Get a grip. If it were a $500 device, it still would have only sold 400k units because that’s all that could be manufactured due to supply constraints on the micro-OLED displays.
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.
Vision Pro Creator Taking Over Siri After Apple Intelligence Setbacks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You just can't convince me that the way Tim was talking about "it's here" ... and him allowing himself to be photographed in it ... didn't mean that he thought this was his "iPhone moment"
Vanity Fair full spreads aren't things you do for v1 concepts meant to just "get something out there"
That's not who VF hits with
Definitely will have to agree to disagree on this one
To me this is egg on the face and folks have been, since then, trying to convince everyone Apple never even meant for this under cooked 1 egg omelette to be fed to anyone.
I'm just not buying it
Apple has long been known to work on a decade horizon with products worked on 3 years in advance and new product categories developed for far longer than that.
You can trace this to the development of new categories like the iPhone which started as an iPad first in development in 2002 and became the iPhone released in 2007. The iPad itself released 3 years later in 2010. That cadence has continued in modern Apple with Vision Pro starting development in 2015 and released 9 years later.
Apple was the CEO in 2011 when he died, hence there was a standard 8-10 year long roadmap that he envisioned because he was CEO and that he would've executed on but he died so that was his final roadmap.
Nobody is saying he left a literal map specifically written in gold leaf for Tim Cook knowing he was going to die. In fact, Steve told Cook to be his own CEO. But Steve's at the time current roadmap at Apple was the final guidance for Apple's future. How much of that Cook executed on, we don't know but we do know that Steve's last big move was acquiring Siri and implementing it in the iPhone4S, released on October 4, 2011. Steve Jobs died October 5th. Tim Cook either decided to throw out Steve's intentions for Siri, or didn't understand them. Either of those have proven a terrible decision.
Say what you will about Vision Pro, but 1) it shipped, and 2) it works.
Short memories is exactly right. All the debate about the AVP, people seem to forget that 12 months ago, Cook was banging on about how augmented reality was the future that had now, miraculously, arrived.
Fast forward 6 months, and after a much slower than expected AR uptake, both in AVPs sold (with a return rate off the charts) and in the mindset of consumers, he then pivoted to AI as the “next big thing” as the competition ramped up. Primarily in order to stay relevant, he tried to shoehorn gimped functionality into an already retarded Siri and then, until last week, knowing it was a dud, continued to dishonestly sell it hard as the killer upgrade feature of the new iPhone 16 range.
…Driving towards shipping a product which is too heavy (giving people neck and headaches), needs a huge external battery, etc. And then no one buys it, so developers lose interest.
I’m not sure that’s the right kind of “driving towards shipping.”
Exactly right
A dispassionate analysis of what's actually gone on before our eyes is honestly somewhat alarming.
It shows leadership pivoting from pillar to post trying to find something ... figure something out ... it feels like the total opposite of a coherent vision for the future, what it looks like, where consumers are within it and what product roadmap would support that vision.
Why not. John has a personality and is someone many would be pleased to spend time with unlike the wet dishrag and zombie Cook who could not even wave a flag with some energy at a car race. Bring on Ternus. Give Cook a cardboard box and tell him to pack up his personal effects and be out of Cupertino by 5PM March 21.
If you've used it for any length of time, then yes, the future is here. It will be lighter and cheaper and more attractive, but it's definitely the future.
Source for return rates "being off the charts"? Because everything I've read says that is untrue.
Are you kidding? A technical success that thing with scary fake eyes in front l, heavier than all headsets without integrating a battery and with less field of view than cheaper competitors? The only good thing about it was the screen and that wasn’t even designed by Apple.
just for clarity cause you made some typo - Cook was CEO a few months before Jobs passed, handpicked by Jobs.
And yes, timeline for new products can be spanning a decade in some cases.
Assuming that Jobs had a "vision" or "intention" for Siri - we do not know. He also famously said "I cracked the TV" and nothing meaningful came out of that "vision".
Jobs was unique, clearly had a vision for products and part of that are also some "dumb visions", got to take risks. But he's gone for a long time and a lot of things have changed. I know how people here continue to "miss" him, but the whole industry hasn't really innovated much, eg, laptops are the same concept as 30+ years ago, a screen, a keyboard with some input device too, all the details (processor, screen resolution etc) are technical evolutions, nothing earth shattering, smartphones the same in 20 years or so ...
Name anyone similar to Jobs in the tech industry ,I can't really think of anyone ...
Referencing Jobs is living in the past, not where the future lies.
What? By 1988 Mac sales (Mac SE, SE30, Mac II, Mac Portable, Mac IIx) exceeded Apple II sales. I still have a 1985 //c and it still works, amazingly. The Apple II line sold in the millions.
Like iPod... (who asked for a thousand songs in your pocket?)
iPhone with a non-mechanical keyboard (who asked for that?)
iPad... it's just a big iPhone (nobody asked for that)
Watch... who asked for that? If I want to know the time, I'll just look at my iPhone.
The Facetime reactions popup is blocking the button for boardmembers to be able to fire Tim.
Also from the article:
Nah, Apple and the market had much lower expectations from the outset and for the initial ramp-up. It's amazing how so many people on this forum forget that most of Apple's "hits" aren't instant hits and how they can armchair QB this now garguntuan ship to perennial success. Apple is going to guess wrong on some of its bets, like the car and AI. Strategically, they were probably planning to use much of the same tech that would branch off in different ways. That strategy worked for OS X and Apple Silicon. But that also means they aren't as agile as a narrowly-focused VC-backed startup. I have some of friends who worked for SRI (the parent of Siri when it was spun-off) when Apple acquired Siri. The friends weren't in the Siri division and used Android phones so they had little knowledge of the project. I don't know how much of the original Siri team is still at Apple. Some probably stayed for a while, others went into other opportunities in the then-burgeoning machine learning market. As far as ML goes, Apple got much of what it wanted out of Siri. They weren't prepared for the coming AI storm and Siri wasn't either, so Apple should've quickly acquired someone else more in that vein. Vision Pro wasn't going to be an instant hit except for early adopters. With enough care, feeding, and price drops, it'll become a hit.
Nothing like any of those products honestly.
They all sold more than a million in their first quarter of availability.
And…a lawsuit was filed in district court in San Joe accusing Apple of false advertising over Apple Intelligence:
"Apple's advertisements saturated the internet, television, and other airwaves to cultivate a clear and reasonable consumer expectation that these transformative features would be available upon the iPhone's release," the suit reads.
"Apple's advertisements saturated the internet, television, and other airwaves to cultivate a clear and reasonable consumer expectation that these transformative features would be available upon the iPhone's release," the suit reads.
- "This drove unprecedented excitement in the market, even for Apple, as the company knew it would, and as part of Apple's ongoing effort to convince consumers to upgrade at a premium price and to distinguish itself from competitors deemed to be winning the AI arms race."
- "Contrary to Defendant's claims of advanced AI capabilities, the Products offered a significantly limited or entirely absent version of Apple Intelligence, misleading consumers about its actual utility and performance. Worse yet, Defendant promoted its Products based on these overstated AI capabilities, leading consumers to believe they were purchasing a device with features that did not exist or were materially misrepresented."