Or, they took a different approach that allowed the product to launch now to early adopters and enterprise uses, letting the product and the software mature over time until a mass-market, consumer oriented device is ready.
Nah. Folks just need to stop trying to measure an F-16 as if it was a Cessna and then complaining because the F-16 costs more and fails as a crop duster.The original iPhone was also a pretty overpriced product for early-adopters, but it sold 1 million units in 74 days.
I think there's a few more truths that Tim really should admit to.
The era is here, right now, for me. I'm using spatial computing today. Just because you're not using it doesn't mean nobody is using it.
I personally like technology, so I like to see cutting edge AI, but do you know what the overwhelming amount of people want? Useful stuff. Which is why Apple keeps winning in the market against the impatient kids in the race.
Apple’s marketing and the demo/buying experience in the Apple Stores certainly tried to convey the impression of a mass-market product.
And because META treats the devices as loss-leaders for their real goal, data collection. They sell the headsets at a loss, because, again, YOU are the product. Apple doesn't operate that way.
That is not what Tim Cook just said. He said the era is now “in the future.” That’s the shift - from “it is here” to “it is in the future.”
It shows that a lot of people have money to burn, and the net profit is probably far from covering the R&D costs. The trajectory on the next releases will be interesting.
It tried to convey a product and a product category that you could use today. Which I do, daily.
Part of why I don't participate in the AVP forum is that the haters join every thread and turn it into a bash session. It got tiring. It remains tiring.
Huh? This is so much hair-splitting trying to be "right" about your opinion. My AVP is here, right now, today, and I'm doing productive work on it, here, right now, today.
Mac, not an Apple I. The v1 128k Mac sold for what would be ~$7-8k in today's dollars I think. My employer had a Lisa ordered but changed the order to two (cheaper) Macs when the 128k Mac was announced. The bonus extra Mac meant that as a young engineer I had one of the first Macs off the line on my desk; quite an experience constantly switching diskettes.
Why wait? You already linked to the product you claim to want. So buy that one.
Came here to say something similar. It's wild to refer to such an expensive, first-gen product being within spitting distance of 500k as anything less than a success.
One has to see this in the context of the size of Apple’s user base. The iPhone user base is around 1.5 billion. That means roughly 1 in 3000 iPhone users was interested enough (and well-off enough) to buy one.
He didn't admit it isn't selling as expected. In fact, the word "admit" is a fabrication by MacRumors. And you, it seems.
I totally agree. But given its price, why are you surprised? With a high price comes low mass adoption. With low mass adoption comes lack of developer commitment - after all, developers aren't going to invest their time/money/resources if they don't expect to see a return on that investment. Classic check-and-egg problem. Which wouldn't exist if the VP had some "must have" feature built in. But it doesn't - Apple seems to be hoping that a killer app will be provided by the developer community....but those guys need Apple to sell a few million VPs before they care enough.
