There's no misquote. The 8 million was, as MR reported, the figure for the AVP: "Moreover, Apple has purportedly suspended work on the original second-generation Vision Pro for at least a year to focus on developing
a lower-cost headset. Interestingly, Apple told suppliers to prepare to build
four million low-cost headsets over the entire lifespan of the future product.
This is half the total number of Vision Pros that Apple told suppliers to produce."
Apple's first-generation Vision Pro headset may have now ceased production, following reports of reduced demand and production cuts earlier in...
www.macrumors.com
The MacRumors piece, which cited the October article from The Information, was poorly written, and the latter wasn't as clear as it should have been. From The Information article:
"Apple has told at least one supplier to expect to produce enough components for 4 million units over the entire lifespan of the cheaper model, which is internally code-named N109, according to one person involved in the Vision Pro supply chain. It previously told this supplier to expect to produce enough components for 8 million Vision Pros over its entire lifespan, though it made that estimate before the product launched."
And here's what MacRumors said:
"Moreover, Apple has purportedly suspended work on the original second-generation Vision Pro for at least a year to focus on developing a lower-cost headset. Interestingly, Apple told suppliers to prepare to build four million low-cost headsets over the entire lifespan of the future product. This is half the total number of Vision Pros that Apple told suppliers to produce, suggesting that sales expectations are even lower for the cheaper headset."
The key difference is that The Information claimed Apple ordered components for 8 million AVPs
over its entire lifespan, which would include the original headset plus any future versions, whether less expensive, more capable, or both. As well, they said this estimate was made
before the product launched, which MacRumors omitted.
It's clear the AVP hasn't met Apple's expectations, mostly because of its high price point, which Tim Cook acknowledged. But all the reporting I read before and shortly after introduction suggested Apple didn't expect to sell more than, say, 500,000 units of the original version.
Regardless, my post was in response to yours, one of many "AVP is a flop" posts here and on other sites. And here's what you said about the AVP previously: "…they (Apple) made this DOA device. It attracts attention to itself because it's the epitome of the Apple stereotype - they make underpowered status objects for rich people."
How presumptuous of you to generalize that Apple makes devices that serve as status symbols for the wealthy. That may apply to some, but I've been using Apple products since 1981, when I was hardly rich by any standard. In the real world, I and many others are using the AVP for entertainment and work.
