Depends on which part of the internet. I've seen people who have some actual knowledge of the device who have been absolutely raving about it for months.
...anyone who gives their opinion on a product based on the design, features, or price of a product before those details are even known is an absolute moron.
The internet has allowed morons to share their moronic thoughts with others. The ones that listen turn into morons themselves. This is the real pandemic — welcome to the internet: home of the moron flu.
Perhaps the greatest disappointment of all in online forums is the incessant name-calling and the emojis which follow in support of the name-calling. Basically, the uncaring remarks above are labeling nearly everyone here a "moron" for having commented. That is not constructive. It amounts to little more than an emotionally charged distraction.
It is a part of human nature to comment on pretty much everything. That is why this forum exists.
It is easier to name-call than to write intelligently. So many choose the easy path. But the better approach is to present a reasoned commentary based on what we know now (which admittedly is limited) and based on what we speculate. There is no harm in that. Indeed, it provokes positive thought.
Why do I even care? Because reading the comments under articles is often more pleasing than the articles themselves, at least until we get to the name-calling.
Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success. This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this. When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k? Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then. Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal. And Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone. And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.
The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.
Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.
Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook?
The MacBook Air filled that hole. So in a sense, they did release a netbook.
A lower cost thin and light was what the netbook rage was about. MacBook Air did that-Apple style.
No, Apple answer to a netbook was the iPad. Netbooks about completely disappeared in just about 2 years after the iPad (and other copycat tablets) came to market in 2010. Apple just thought different and got rid of the physical keyboard. iPads even competed with netbooks in price. At the time, iPads only disadvantage was that they didn't run on any version of MS Windows. Which in the end, turned out to be an advantage. Bet there are way more 1st and 2nd generation iPads still in use to day, than netbooks. I'm still using two them. One of them daily.
Apparently you have no memory that Apple has produced its own fair share of failures. There were articles here about how the HomePod had the same market share as companies in the S&P and then they were gone. But, Cook is making noises that he wants to leave. But before he does, he needs a product he can call his own and they could spend to make sure that this is it. This whole idea has never made sense unless it was for gaming or health and no doubt many on this forum will run out a buy a Gen1 headset. Always a bad idea BTW unless you never open it and sell it 20 years from now at auction.
Was the HomePod really a failure? It was spun out of all the research and development that led to the AirPods (probably developed concurrently), failure no? The biggest problem of the HomePod was the lack of wired connections something so simple. Once you have a great device the little things like the inputs and outputs do matter, they are as important as the OS and the Apple SOC.
https://audioengine.com/shop/wirelessspeakers/a5-wireless/ (the lack of wired connections, kills the possibility of incorporating the HomePod with existing sound systems and it kills the possibility of using speakers to their full lifespan, speakers good ones at least easily last for more than a decade).
There is a rumor that the battery pack for the Apple headgear uses a MagSafe connection to connect the battery with the headset, MagSafe a technology that Apple used and then put on the shelf for a few years, before bringing it back. (Note: it is a technology that should have been incorporated into the new 27 inch Studio Display monitor, that old fashion power connector should have never been used, not after they came up with that great MagSafe connection on the new 24 inch M1 iMac).
I didn’t know the internet could speak. But I do know that a bunch of self-appointed pundits and prognosticators who have no idea what Apple is going to show us next week don’t speak for me, and I use the internet on a daily basis.
Why not wait to see what it is before commenting on it?
Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success. This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this. When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k? Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then. Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal. And Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone. And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.
The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.
Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.
Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook?
IMO, the lack of a true netbook was a huge miss. As was the original iMac with only USB1. As was, ironically, the delay in getting USB2 onto Macs. As was not buying Netflix. As was not opening up firewire. As was fiasco on 5G/QC...
Let's not forget the whole concept of NetBoot and where that could have gone for business and education.
The question should not be if Apple was doomed because of those 'errors' but how much more they could have achieved by following through with some moves.
I’d say the jury is out on not buying Netflix. We won’t know if Apple made the right decision until Apple has spent on Apple TV+ as much as they would have had to pay to buy Netflix.
Certainly buying Beats and associated music service has been shown to be a big success for Apple. At $3 billon the jump start they got was worth it, plus just the Beats hardware has far more than paid back their investment by now.
I don’t think Apple is going to spend Google or Microsoft sums of money to buy some outside company, 3 billion dollars so far has been their limit, the content/gaming companies are a complete waste of money to actually buy (because the talent isn’t owned by the company in most cases).
Apple probably did the right thing long-term by building their content from the ground up, they certainly saved a lot of money, if Apple decides to get into gaming (the engine), they actually may need to buy the gaming engine (Unreal Engine which will never happen), or develop something in house from the ground up, maybe all that work (years) behind the scenes with the SOC, GPU, Headset, and Metal software is all part of the master plan? Monday June 5 should be interesting.
If someone isn’t interested in the concept of VR or AR, that is fine. But anyone who gives their opinion on a product based on the design, features, or price of a product before those details are even known is an absolute moron.
The internet has allowed morons to share their moronic thoughts with others. The ones that listen turn into morons themselves. This is the real pandemic — welcome to the internet: home of the moron flu.
Are you mad because you missed the boat, sitting on the sidelines (at the dock) is usually is the home/place of bigger morons.
If someone isn’t interested in the concept of VR or AR, that is fine. But anyone who gives their opinion on a product based on the design, features, or price of a product before those details are even known is an absolute moron.
The internet has allowed morons to share their moronic thoughts with others. The ones that listen turn into morons themselves. This is the real pandemic — welcome to the internet: home of the moron flu.
Right now I am not interested, and doubt I will be. But then I said that about AirPods. Until I tried them. My partner said that about AirPods. Until she tried them. So you just never know. As Steve Jobs once said, “It’s really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them.”
...anyone who gives their opinion on a product based on the design, features, or price of a product before those details are even known is an absolute moron.
The internet has allowed morons to share their moronic thoughts with others. The ones that listen turn into morons themselves. This is the real pandemic — welcome to the internet: home of the moron flu.
Perhaps the greatest disappointment of all in online forums is the incessant name-calling and the emojis which follow in support of the name-calling. Basically, the uncaring remarks above are labeling nearly everyone here a "moron" for having commented. That is not constructive. It amounts to little more than an emotionally charged distraction.
It is a part of human nature to comment on pretty much everything. That is why this forum exists.
It is easier to name-call than to write intelligently. So many choose the easy path. But the better approach is to present a reasoned commentary based on what we know now (which admittedly is limited) and based on what we speculate. There is no harm in that. Indeed, it provokes positive thought.
Why do I even care? Because reading the comments under articles is often more pleasing than the articles themselves, at least until we get to the name-calling.
There is a whole lot of grey in between the black and white reality you attempt to paint. Kierkegaarden raises a legitimate and reasonable point, even though the way they did it made you feel sad.
Bring on WWDC. I can’t wait to see how many people flip sides and pretend like they knew all along how great it would be. At the very least we will have an actual, real object to discuss…because all these people unilaterally calling a still nonexistent product a failure just because they don’t approve of (x) rumor are getting really tiresome.
...all these people unilaterally calling a still nonexistent product a failure just because they don’t approve of (x) rumor are getting really tiresome.
I myself never called it a failure, and I don't dwell deeply on such remarks, mainly because the "it's doomed!" contenders cannot produce anymore of a reasoned argument than the name-callers. But at the same time, we ought to talk about forthcoming products and ponder the ways they might enhance our own lives, as well as freely discuss the negatives. And whenever we have such conversations, there will be those folks who are overly negative, but such is life. Any manner of verbal stone throwing by you or me at the "it's a failure!" folks will achieve nothing beneficial in the end. So while it may be "tiring" to read what they write, it's best to take a deep breath and just skip to the next post, rather than waste time typing out a fireball post that seeks to either berate them or magically transform their thinking.
To repeat what I said earlier, I don't like watches in general on my wrist, but I am glad most people do like them because that benefits Apple's bottom line, which in turn has a positive impact on my AAPL holdings. If the same proves true of the AR/VR device, great! Honestly, I am eager to see what people think after the WWDC announcement because it helps me to consider in what ways it might impact me. Boosting of the AAPL stock price is fine and well, but I am a lover of Apple products too. I just only buy the products that I find useful in my life. So long as the thing isn't targeted mainly at gamers, like the Apple Watch is mainly targeted at health nuts, then perhaps the headset might prove useful to me or my family in some way.
Anyone remember Michael Dell saying that the Apple Stores will be a flop ? Gateway was closing its stores and there was a strong consensus everywhere that retail and computer manufacturers just did not match well together?
I would be happy if Apple released a new version of the AirPods Max, able to fold inward so it is more compact for travel and able to fit in a decent case (that it comes with). Oh and dropped the price to around the same as its Bose and Sony competitors.
Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success. This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this. When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k? Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then. Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal. And Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone. And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.
The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.
Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.
Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook?
The MacBook Air filled that hole. So in a sense, they did release a netbook.
A lower cost thin and light was what the netbook rage was about. MacBook Air did that-Apple style.
No, Apple answer to a netbook was the iPad. Netbooks about completely disappeared in just about 2 years after the iPad (and other copycat tablets) came to market in 2010. Apple just thought different and got rid of the physical keyboard. iPads even competed with netbooks in price. At the time, iPads only disadvantage was that they didn't run on any version of MS Windows. Which in the end, turned out to be an advantage. Bet there are way more 1st and 2nd generation iPads still in use to day, than netbooks. I'm still using two them. One of them daily.
No. It was the MacBook Air.
Apples answer to the Kindle was the iPad.
One of main reason why netbooks were so popular back in 2007 to 2010 was because they were cheap. They cost like $399 at Walmart. They were not really meant to be full function laptops. They were meant to cost less for users that didn't require a full function laptop and more importantly ..... didn't want to pay for one. And netbooks being smaller, lighter and less powerful were the results making them cost less.
In 2008 when the first MacBook Air came out, it cost $1800. A MacBook at the time still cost $999. How is the MacBook Air competing in the netbook market when it cost $800 more than a MacBook. A Mac user actually had to pay more for a laptop that was designed to be smaller, lighter and less powerful than a MacBook. The MacBook Air was never meant to be like a netbook. One can buy 2 netbooks with $800.
I’m expecting the AR/VR product to require an iPhone just like Watch & Airpods - I suspect the iPhone will provide the bulk of the processing power to enable a smaller/lighter product.
It might even require a brand new iPhone 15, but I suspect iPhone 14 might be the minimum unless it needs the new 3nm chip power/efficiency.
Either way it will nicely drive an uptick in iPhone upgrades.
I’m expecting the AR/VR product to require an iPhone just like Watch & Airpods - I suspect the iPhone will provide the bulk of the processing power to enable a smaller/lighter product.
It might even require a brand new iPhone 15, but I suspect iPhone 14 might be the minimum unless it needs the new 3nm chip power/efficiency.
Either way it will nicely drive an uptick in iPhone upgrades.
No, it will be self powered with it's own M series chip
Informational overlays is what I think will be the killer app. But we need glasses, not a head swallowing scuba face mask.
Key highlights of tours: Give me labels/short descriptions for points of interest on an art gallery or arboretum tour, etc.
Stats for live sports audience: Give me game, play and player stats as I sit in the stands wearing my Apple shades.
Military situational awareness: Give soldiers battlefield situational updates, notification of supplies, evacuation or additional support arriving on scene.
Shared experience: Let me share what I’m seeing with another wearer.
Maybe only locally (visual airdrop), but maybe across the world. This might become a very popular app, maybe even a killer app.
Professional dashboard: Give me a dashboard of key information I need to see in real-time. Floor traders, doctors, oil rig managers, emergency responders, anyone actively managing an unfolding event or ongoing process with changing status or key information.
Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success. This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this. When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k? Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then. Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal. And Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone. And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.
The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.
Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.
Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook?
The MacBook Air filled that hole. So in a sense, they did release a netbook.
A lower cost thin and light was what the netbook rage was about. MacBook Air did that-Apple style.
No, Apple answer to a netbook was the iPad. Netbooks about completely disappeared in just about 2 years after the iPad (and other copycat tablets) came to market in 2010. Apple just thought different and got rid of the physical keyboard. iPads even competed with netbooks in price. At the time, iPads only disadvantage was that they didn't run on any version of MS Windows. Which in the end, turned out to be an advantage. Bet there are way more 1st and 2nd generation iPads still in use to day, than netbooks. I'm still using two them. One of them daily.
No. It was the MacBook Air.
Apples answer to the Kindle was the iPad.
One of main reason why netbooks were so popular back in 2007 to 2010 was because they were cheap. They cost like $399 at Walmart. They were not really meant to be full function laptops. They were meant to cost less for users that didn't require a full function laptop and more importantly ..... didn't want to pay for one. And netbooks being smaller, lighter and less powerful were the results making them cost less.
In 2008 when the first MacBook Air came out, it cost $1800. A MacBook at the time still cost $999. How is the MacBook Air competing in the netbook market when it cost $800 more than a MacBook. A Mac user actually had to pay more for a laptop that was designed to be smaller, lighter and less powerful than a MacBook. The MacBook Air was never meant to be like a netbook. One can buy 2 netbooks with $800.
The impetus behind the short-lived netbook era can arguably be tied back to the one laptop per child (OLPC) initiative. The goal of that initiative was to put a personally owned laptop device in as many hands as possible, with primary emphasis on serving financially disadvantaged children in third world countries who were being left behind as the rest of the world moved increasingly towards information, media, and educational material, e.g., books, being consumed electronically.
The OLPC initiative was largely considered a failure in large part due to the inadequacies of the device itself, but the initiative did identify a certain level of interest in low-cost minimalist computers that could leverage connectivity to compensate for a lack of built-in capability. The problem with netbooks, later repeated with their descendants in the form of ChromeBooks, was that once you add in a critical mass of quality components like adequate memory, storage, and high resolution screens, they were not longer inexpensive for what were still far less than fully functional laptop computers.
The reality of the netbook and ChromeBook market as it related to Apple is that neither of these suboptimal platforms were ever within the realm of consideration for the markets and customers that Apple serves. Even Apple’s most price conscious products are still higher in price and quality than what the competition is willing to accept. It’s never been in Apple’s DNA to go after those consumers who are looking only at the price and willing to sacrifice on quality and functionality. Netbooks were never an option.
Comments
It is a part of human nature to comment on pretty much everything. That is why this forum exists.
It is easier to name-call than to write intelligently. So many choose the easy path. But the better approach is to present a reasoned commentary based on what we know now (which admittedly is limited) and based on what we speculate. There is no harm in that. Indeed, it provokes positive thought.
Why do I even care? Because reading the comments under articles is often more pleasing than the articles themselves, at least until we get to the name-calling.
Ditto my earlier comment. I now look forward to seeing WWDC.
https://audioengine.com/shop/wirelessspeakers/a5-wireless/ (the lack of wired connections, kills the possibility of incorporating the HomePod with existing sound systems and it kills the possibility of using speakers to their full lifespan, speakers good ones at least easily last for more than a decade).
There is a rumor that the battery pack for the Apple headgear uses a MagSafe connection to connect the battery with the headset, MagSafe a technology that Apple used and then put on the shelf for a few years, before bringing it back. (Note: it is a technology that should have been incorporated into the new 27 inch Studio Display monitor, that old fashion power connector should have never been used, not after they came up with that great MagSafe connection on the new 24 inch M1 iMac).
Apple probably did the right thing long-term by building their content from the ground up, they certainly saved a lot of money, if Apple decides to get into gaming (the engine), they actually may need to buy the gaming engine (Unreal Engine which will never happen), or develop something in house from the ground up, maybe all that work (years) behind the scenes with the SOC, GPU, Headset, and Metal software is all part of the master plan? Monday June 5 should be interesting.
To repeat what I said earlier, I don't like watches in general on my wrist, but I am glad most people do like them because that benefits Apple's bottom line, which in turn has a positive impact on my AAPL holdings. If the same proves true of the AR/VR device, great! Honestly, I am eager to see what people think after the WWDC announcement because it helps me to consider in what ways it might impact me. Boosting of the AAPL stock price is fine and well, but I am a lover of Apple products too. I just only buy the products that I find useful in my life. So long as the thing isn't targeted mainly at gamers, like the Apple Watch is mainly targeted at health nuts, then perhaps the headset might prove useful to me or my family in some way.
In 2008 when the first MacBook Air came out, it cost $1800. A MacBook at the time still cost $999. How is the MacBook Air competing in the netbook market when it cost $800 more than a MacBook. A Mac user actually had to pay more for a laptop that was designed to be smaller, lighter and less powerful than a MacBook. The MacBook Air was never meant to be like a netbook. One can buy 2 netbooks with $800.
https://www.dignited.com/75988/netbook-explained/
Give me labels/short descriptions for points of interest on an art gallery or arboretum tour, etc.
Stats for live sports audience:
Give me game, play and player stats as I sit in the stands wearing my Apple shades.
Give soldiers battlefield situational updates, notification of supplies, evacuation or additional support arriving on scene.
Let me share what I’m seeing with another wearer.
Give me a dashboard of key information I need to see in real-time. Floor traders, doctors, oil rig managers, emergency responders, anyone actively managing an unfolding event or ongoing process with changing status or key information.
now and then. And this is the most advanced ski goggle Apple every made.
The OLPC initiative was largely considered a failure in large part due to the inadequacies of the device itself, but the initiative did identify a certain level of interest in low-cost minimalist computers that could leverage connectivity to compensate for a lack of built-in capability. The problem with netbooks, later repeated with their descendants in the form of ChromeBooks, was that once you add in a critical mass of quality components like adequate memory, storage, and high resolution screens, they were not longer inexpensive for what were still far less than fully functional laptop computers.
The reality of the netbook and ChromeBook market as it related to Apple is that neither of these suboptimal platforms were ever within the realm of consideration for the markets and customers that Apple serves. Even Apple’s most price conscious products are still higher in price and quality than what the competition is willing to accept. It’s never been in Apple’s DNA to go after those consumers who are looking only at the price and willing to sacrifice on quality and functionality. Netbooks were never an option.