I wonder if they realized a while back this will never go anywhere. So they set the price point high for the purpose of recouping at least some of the R&D costs while getting fewer units out in the world rather than more. The fewer sales, the less visible the failure since they know they're walking away from it. Just a theory.
The value in shipping a v0 is the learnings, not the revenue. It will probably cost apple more to bring this to market than they will make, even if you consider everything up until now a sunk cost.
But once you get a product in market, you start to understand things about the future of that market.
the article clearly says theyre ballparking 100-400k Vision pros and pushing back production of Vision (non-pro). They arent stopping at all, its just a complicated product.
Many people shouted saying the iPad would fail, that the Airpods would fail that the Apple watch would fail. All 3 took time to mature into money printing juggernauts. By 2030 VR/AR Apple goggles may be yet another big thing that many doubted.
It is entirely possible that this isn't a demand-related adjustment.
Certainly, that's what the reports I've read suggested: Apple seems to be reacting that the demand is unchanged, but they are saying they got hamstrung by an 11th hour supply chain issue.
I can't tell you if that is true or not, but it is a complex product (much more so than competing HMDs, with all those cameras, not to mention unique custom fabrics), so there is enough baseline evidence to suggest that Apple is telling the truth, that this isn't a demand-side adjustment, and that there have been supply chain hiccups that they didn't expect following their launch announcement.
That said I can tell you that Apple's expected demand still sounds startling high based on what I know of the finished product and its cost, so I can agree that a demand-side expectation shift makes sense as a theory, but also Apple is the company that sold millions of first gen products people were skeptical about before and I can imagine Apple doing it again.
I don't really see much of an advantage for AR over VR if you're still confined to a single space. AR will take off when you can get it in an Oakley form-factor.
i was under the impression it wasnt confined. Even before the rayban/oakleys form factor, theres work to be done from a developer and app experiences perspective. Seems like that's the target demographic: Developers.
The use isn't literally confined to a single space but try to imagine use-cases where the passthrough is necessary: driving, exploring a new city, taking the subway, going hiking or biking. It's impossible to imagine this headset being useful in those environments.
IMO "monitors you wear on your head" is more immediately useful than a "heads up display you bring with you everywhere". I would love more screen real estate for work. Don't necessarily want more ads overlaid on everything when I go for a walk.
Your use-case provides few advantages over a physical monitor, let alone over a VR monitor, which was my point. And if you think monitor adjustments trump realtime interaction with arbitrary physical environments then we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not sure what you mean by ads everywhere, except to be needlessly dismissive.
What do you mean by "over a VR monitor"? Isn't that that my use case is?
The little bit of consumer AR I've seen tended to be ad laden. I'm talking about Yelp walking overlays, etc. I can't think of a need for AR in my life except navigation, personally. But I lead a pretty boring life.
The whole AR thing just seems like a solution in search of a problem. Like 90s strategy video games that try to show you everything in the UI all at once. Maybe cool if you're trying to do some super specialized complex task like car maintenance or air traffic control or whatever, but otherwise it just seems like a distraction, like smartwatches but worse.
> What do you mean by "over a VR monitor"? Isn't that that my use case is?
The Apple Vision Pro has VR and AR capabilities. When you view a representation of your monitor it's VR. When your monitor is represented as an object in physical space then it's AR. Apple Vision Pro can do both, but my point is I don't understand the value in the latter, at least at the price point, and you actually seem to be agreeing with me.
> The little bit of consumer AR I've seen tended to be ad laden. I'm talking about Yelp walking overlays, etc. I can't think of a need for AR in my life except navigation, personally. But I lead a pretty boring life.
I can think of literally hundreds of interesting applications. Imagine any scenario where you have superhero vision in the real world.
> The whole AR thing just seems like a solution in search of a problem. Like 90s strategy video games that try to show you everything in the UI all at once. Maybe cool if you're trying to do some super specialized complex task like car maintenance or air traffic control or whatever, but otherwise it just seems like a distraction, like smartwatches but worse.
Again, to each his own, but I love my smartwatch. I have a personal status screen that I can check in under a second without pulling out my phone, and tons of simple apps to go with it. It saves me tons of time and mental energy every day, and I can think of lots of cases where having things displayed instantaneously in your field of view would generate value.
> The Apple Vision Pro has VR and AR capabilities. When you view a representation of your monitor it's VR. When your monitor is represented as an object in physical space then it's AR. Apple Vision Pro can do both, but my point is I don't understand the value in the latter, at least at the price point
Safety is a big reason to prefer AR for "big monitors" in HMD, especially in any home with furniture (much less clutter) or children or pets. Apple's argument so far seems to be that to get that sort of AR right in an HMD form factor much of the price is necessary (they pack in a lot of cameras to do it right) and the high price may not be an accident, it may be a requirement for good AR (at least in an HMD with current tech).
16 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 38.3 ms ] threadBut once you get a product in market, you start to understand things about the future of that market.
the article clearly says theyre ballparking 100-400k Vision pros and pushing back production of Vision (non-pro). They arent stopping at all, its just a complicated product.
I bet this was Apple's bet on the 'metaverse'. Now that it seems clear it probably isn't going to happen, they look at revising their plans.
Certainly, that's what the reports I've read suggested: Apple seems to be reacting that the demand is unchanged, but they are saying they got hamstrung by an 11th hour supply chain issue.
I can't tell you if that is true or not, but it is a complex product (much more so than competing HMDs, with all those cameras, not to mention unique custom fabrics), so there is enough baseline evidence to suggest that Apple is telling the truth, that this isn't a demand-side adjustment, and that there have been supply chain hiccups that they didn't expect following their launch announcement.
That said I can tell you that Apple's expected demand still sounds startling high based on what I know of the finished product and its cost, so I can agree that a demand-side expectation shift makes sense as a theory, but also Apple is the company that sold millions of first gen products people were skeptical about before and I can imagine Apple doing it again.
The little bit of consumer AR I've seen tended to be ad laden. I'm talking about Yelp walking overlays, etc. I can't think of a need for AR in my life except navigation, personally. But I lead a pretty boring life.
The whole AR thing just seems like a solution in search of a problem. Like 90s strategy video games that try to show you everything in the UI all at once. Maybe cool if you're trying to do some super specialized complex task like car maintenance or air traffic control or whatever, but otherwise it just seems like a distraction, like smartwatches but worse.
OK, back to my old man lawn now.
The Apple Vision Pro has VR and AR capabilities. When you view a representation of your monitor it's VR. When your monitor is represented as an object in physical space then it's AR. Apple Vision Pro can do both, but my point is I don't understand the value in the latter, at least at the price point, and you actually seem to be agreeing with me.
> The little bit of consumer AR I've seen tended to be ad laden. I'm talking about Yelp walking overlays, etc. I can't think of a need for AR in my life except navigation, personally. But I lead a pretty boring life.
I can think of literally hundreds of interesting applications. Imagine any scenario where you have superhero vision in the real world.
> The whole AR thing just seems like a solution in search of a problem. Like 90s strategy video games that try to show you everything in the UI all at once. Maybe cool if you're trying to do some super specialized complex task like car maintenance or air traffic control or whatever, but otherwise it just seems like a distraction, like smartwatches but worse.
Again, to each his own, but I love my smartwatch. I have a personal status screen that I can check in under a second without pulling out my phone, and tons of simple apps to go with it. It saves me tons of time and mental energy every day, and I can think of lots of cases where having things displayed instantaneously in your field of view would generate value.
Safety is a big reason to prefer AR for "big monitors" in HMD, especially in any home with furniture (much less clutter) or children or pets. Apple's argument so far seems to be that to get that sort of AR right in an HMD form factor much of the price is necessary (they pack in a lot of cameras to do it right) and the high price may not be an accident, it may be a requirement for good AR (at least in an HMD with current tech).
I sold all my AAPL stock as soon as I could.