Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Many people replied your exact “not interested” “not for me” “no thanks” “hard pass” “it will flop” etc right before iphone release. Msft CEO Steve Balmer was the biggest “iphone will flop!” critic lol

This just isn't a very good analogy, but I understand the temptation to use it. Everyone knew what a smartphone was for in 2007. Sure, many underestimated what was possible with capacitive touch and a full-fledged browser, and others doubted whether Apple could compete with the big phone players, but we understood the problems it was solving. I had a Motorola Q and a few guys at work had HTC Moguls and similar, and we all had Palm Pilots/Handsprings and MP3 players before that. The iPhone did not require a behavioral change. It simply and smoothly consolidated the devices we already used.

I see nothing of the sort for the VP. We aren't running around trying to do what it does, but in more awkward ways. The predecessor devices aren't in wide use. In fact, it sounds from comments here like most are collecting dust and judgement on their usefulness has already been passed. No one can articulate a use for them other than for gaming and using large screens; and speaking for myself, I will not be coding large projects with heavy, sweaty, tethered goggles on my head. Same for video editing. I've also seen the medical/surgical debate in other threads; and, no, without FDA approval these won't be used for that. So, that leaves us with games, an area where Apple doesn't really seem serious.

As a stockholder, I will gladly eat crow if I am wrong, but this doesn't feel like the iPhone introduction at all. It feels more like the HomePod - no actual improvement in personal assistant technology, home use only, cheaper more versatile options abound. They will sell them like they sell HomePods, but as smartphones become more and more indistinguishable commodities, it will not be their bridge to the next mass market device.
 
In spite of my excitement, I'm gonna to let a few of you jump on this grenade and see where it goes. The first year buyers will be beta testers. I really think it's a revolutionary product, but the public will be slow on the uptake, just like they've been with other VR products, albeit inferior. "But it's AR/VR"... yes I know, but the general public doesn't know or care about the difference. Not yet. I'm hoping to see some "like new" or "new without tags" on eBay a few months after the launch.
 
A new product in a new sector requires a killer app.

A lifetime ago, VisiCalc and WordStar made the microcomputer essential.

Excel and Pagemaker made the Macintosh.

Personally, I didn’t see any software at the AVP introduction that made it a must-have.

For AAPL’s sake, something WONDERFUL must be developed quickly.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Dj64Mk7
Lets get this party started!

If there are only 250K as rumored i do expect its going to sell out. Not a huge seller but at that small number it will probably still sell out.

marketing likely has some good research on what the anticipated demand is, and will plan the initial launch to be just a bit under that to make it look like a blockbuster sold out product.

it's $3500 VR. there's no question this will go to probably everyone in the VR category who has lots of disposable income, so it will sell a good amount. but it's by no means a "everyone rush out to get this" product
 
marketing likely has some good research on what the anticipated demand is, and will plan the initial launch to be just a bit under that to make it look like a blockbuster sold out product.

it's $3500 VR. there's no question this will go to probably everyone in the VR category who has lots of disposable income, so it will sell a good amount. but it's by no means a "everyone rush out to get this" product
Many companies will look at this as a super inexpensive multi monitor solution with a host of other benefits. I think you're looking at this through the wrong lens :)
 
A new product in a new sector requires a killer app.

A lifetime ago, VisiCalc and WordStar made the microcomputer essential.

Excel and Pagemaker made the Macintosh.

Personally, I didn’t see any software at the AVP introduction that made it a must-have.

For AAPL’s sake, something WONDERFUL must be developed quickly.
The killer app rarely is available during the time of launch. The apps you mentioned were developed and available after platforms started to gain interest.

What the initial Mac and iPhone did was have just enough apps to show off the potential of the platform. Think MacPaint and MacWrite, and Steve's description of the iPhone as a wide-screen iPod, a phone, and an Internet Communicator.

The Mac and iPhone were not perfect and didn't have a killer app available at launch, but people saw the potential, took interest, useful apps were developed over time, and the platforms grew and took off.
 
The killer app rarely is available during the time of launch. The apps you mentioned were developed and available after platforms started to gain interest.

What the initial Mac and iPhone did was have just enough apps to show off the potential of the platform. Think MacPaint and MacWrite, and Steve's description of the iPhone as a wide-screen iPod, a phone, and an Internet Communicator.

The Mac and iPhone were not perfect and didn't have a killer app available at launch, but people saw the potential, took interest, useful apps were developed over time, and the platforms grew and took off.
True. My concern is that the marketplace may not be as patient with the AVP as it was with the products you mentioned.

The Mac could be used in place of a PC while its advantages were being developed. The iPhone had immediate utility as a cellphone with a comparable form factor, and a better voice mail system.

I can’t envision the AVP substituting for any other product while the killer app is being developed.

What do you think?
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
This just isn't a very good analogy, but I understand the temptation to use it. Everyone knew what a smartphone was for in 2007. Sure, many underestimated what was possible with capacitive touch and a full-fledged browser, and others doubted whether Apple could compete with the big phone players, but we understood the problems it was solving. I had a Motorola Q and a few guys at work had HTC Moguls and similar, and we all had Palm Pilots/Handsprings and MP3 players before that. The iPhone did not require a behavioral change. It simply and smoothly consolidated the devices we already used.

I see nothing of the sort for the VP. We aren't running around trying to do what it does, but in more awkward ways. The predecessor devices aren't in wide use. In fact, it sounds from comments here like most are collecting dust and judgement on their usefulness has already been passed. No one can articulate a use for them other than for gaming and using large screens; and speaking for myself, I will not be coding large projects with heavy, sweaty, tethered goggles on my head. Same for video editing. I've also seen the medical/surgical debate in other threads; and, no, without FDA approval these won't be used for that. So, that leaves us with games, an area where Apple doesn't really seem serious.

As a stockholder, I will gladly eat crow if I am wrong, but this doesn't feel like the iPhone introduction at all. It feels more like the HomePod - no actual improvement in personal assistant technology, home use only, cheaper more versatile options abound. They will sell them like they sell HomePods, but as smartphones become more and more indistinguishable commodities, it will not be their bridge to the next mass market device.
Everything you say is likely true and Apple might still sell a small number of these every year (much less than a million). Whether it ultimately is that useful…I think you are right that at current technology the verdict has been rendered so the question becomes has Apple or will Apple advance the tech enough to change that.

Everyone thought smart phones were interesting but not many people wanted them because they had so many shortcomings. Does Apple have enough tech to redefine the catagory…I am doubtful (even though I am buying to try it for work). But everyone who had used many of them and tried thought it was so different that it was different for them…so who knows.
 
Yeah... just like headphones (going back 120 years).

We're doomed. Again.
Actually earliest headphones were very heavy in the 1880's, a early phone like example was 10 pounds, by the 1890's they were more fashionable. 1891 earbuds were invented, 1910 for first audio headphones.

Comparing the Vision Pro headset to this much older stuff its a featherweight.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: valleian
Bring it on: the first entirely new thing from Apple in a very, VERY long time... 6-7 years of Apple R&D time in the making.

While I lean pretty positive on what is known about it already, I look forward to actually trying one to pass final judgement with my own eyes. Hopefully it does what I would seek out of it very well.
I think the product has a bright future... Just needs to come down in price and mature a bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobeSoundDarryl
True. My concern is that the marketplace may not be as patient with the AVP as it was with the products you mentioned.

The Mac could be used in place of a PC while its advantages were being developed. The iPhone had immediate utility as a cellphone with a comparable form factor, and a better voice mail system.

I can’t envision the AVP substituting for any other product while the killer app is being developed.

What do you think?
I don't think AVP is intended to replace a product, per se, but has the potential to expand or augment how people are interacting with technology now. Just like how the GUI made interacting with a computer completely different from the command line.

If I had to use the same analogy that Steve did with the iPhone - at launch, I think the AVP is an immersive media consumption device, a large-screen iPad, and a virtual workstation. It doesn't replace anything currently being used but just provides a different experience on how to do it.

Apple using the "spatial computer" description is very telling, IMO. Just like MacWrite and MacPaint eventually brought about more sophisticated PageMaker, Photoshop, and desktop publishing, I expect that developers will eventually take what is shown and run with it to come up with working with apps in a completely different way than what we are used to now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: valleian and Antes
The product is amazing, but the price is a huge issue to sell a lot and dominate the market segment! Just think of large OLED TV, which is in very similar situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fullauto
this will not be a thing until it’s in the form of typical glasses if that’s even possible. No one wants to sit in a room full of people with giant headsets on that make your face sweaty and only last a couple hours.
Exactly. The only way for this to succeed is to be the sizes and weight of regular glasses. So, maybe in 20-30 years. iPhone now heats up after a couple of minutes of intense gaming or recording 4K video. Imagine when this thing starts heating up on your head.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.