....Developers, like Apple, are in it for the money - they will only develop for a platform if they can see a potential profit. Such potential does not really exist when the total addressable market is less than a million for the foreseeable future. Maybe a few large development shops will bite because they can afford to take the long view, but not the little developers that have made iPhone such a success.
I'm not sure where you came up with the claim that the total addressable market is "less than a million". Based on what? Apple may see the potential entirely differently than you.
10 to 15 million doctors same again in engineering who deal with weaving things in 3d space 10 million traders who deal in data dense and team communications to make eyesight a thing. a few million each pilots, architects, and builders. and many others who might be able it justify it for the few hours a day they might currently have a desktop for that focused work, research, practice. 50million potential users with very little effort and could easily be 3 to 4 times that.
if we say sales getting production to 1/2million units a quarter is going to be a push and say 3 to 4 year average replacement allowing for hand me downs. Apple are only servicing maybe only 10 to 20% of that potential market before fleet replacement sales kick in and growing market share will need production to kick up another gear.
Although I think the live span with an M2 as base could be longer than that an apple could have a nice market selling accessories to hand me downs.
I think Vision OS is much more than Apple Vision Pro.
Apple now has not just awesome real time OS technology, but the R1 chip's ability to accurately process lots of sensor data in real time is something to keep an eye on.
These things may very well be Apple Car technology being introduced now to be refined for the future. This technology could be used in navigation of cars, airplanes, space ships etc...
Time will tell.
I'm with you. I can't imagine that all that eye and gesture tracking, the 23 million pixel μOLED displays, and designing of a powerful R1 chip was just to go into a VR headset for casual use. While Apple can surely afford it, it doesn't make financial sense unless there's other lateral integration in the works. There's a reason that PSVR, Meta Quest, HP Reverb, MS HoloLens, and others are at the overall tech level they are at.
....Developers, like Apple, are in it for the money - they will only develop for a platform if they can see a potential profit. Such potential does not really exist when the total addressable market is less than a million for the foreseeable future. Maybe a few large development shops will bite because they can afford to take the long view, but not the little developers that have made iPhone such a success.
I'm not sure where you came up with the claim that the total addressable market is "less than a million". Based on what? Apple may see the potential entirely differently than you.
His assumption is ridiculous, but it makes me think of the original iPhone when certain types looked at what Steve Jobs had demoed and determined that the addressable market for it was how many Blackberry and Palm Treo-type devices were on the market to determine the entire market potential for the iPhone. The same goes for the iPad which was entering a market space that was an abject failure with several decades of people trying to shoehorn a desktop version of Windows into a crappy tablet. History may be repeating itself once again.
I'm going to be totally honest here: Using this thing for "productivity" in my work (application development) looks like a nightmare scenario. If I want/need more space, I'll get a second monitor.
As for entertainment? I'll watch movies on my large screen with my wife—and, occasionally, my extended family—by my side thank you very much.
VR? Eh.
There's an awful lot of wishful thinking surrounding this thing.
I probably have a similar set of pragmatic nuts & bolts level of concerns. It may sound trivial, but what’s the typing experience on the Vision Pro? I’m kind of a lousy touch typist. I don’t need to crank out 90 wpm but the typing experience still has to be comfortable and intuitive even if I have to look at the keyboard occasionally. The keyboard and mouse coordination is totally ingrained in my brain and something I don’t even think about. Things like text selection, cut, copy, paste, drag and drop, reformatting text, accessing context (right click) menus, shortcut keys, etc. I know you can use a physical keyboard with the Vision Pro, but what will this really feel like? I’ve never sat at a keyboard while wearing a helmet or face mask.
I can definitely see where having a near infinite palette, design surface, and desk space would be helpful for software design and debugging, especially if you don’t have luxury of being able to attach a 2nd or 3rd monitor to your workstation setup or you’re traveling or working away from the office, say at a job site. I’ve frequently used the iPad Pro as a 2nd monitor while traveling with a notebook computer.
I see a lot of conjecture about possible medical applications using future Vision Pro. These are all interesting ideas and I have little doubt that we’ll see applications for similar technology to Vision Pro in the medium to longer range timeframe. I just wouldn’t bet on Apple being the driving force behind the more elaborate scenarios. If you believe that Apple is struggling to build a car in the timeframes we are accustomed to seeing consumer products hit the market, the prospect of Apple taking on the type of challenges that domain immersed medical systems providers like Siemens, GE, Medtronic, etc., are currently doing seems far more daunting.
I think there are nearer term, even current, applications that the Vision Pro could serve in patient healthcare. For example, letting people who are undergoing dialysis, chemotherapy, and other lengthy and debilitating therapies may find some level of relief by being immersed in the kinds of experiences the Vision Pro offers.
So confusing to read this site lately. Depending on the writer, the Vision Pro is either the second coming or a total disaster. Isn't the job of the editor to have a consistent tone?
I think the opposite is true. It's refreshing that the authors' personal opinions (however varied they may be) can sit under the same banner.
It is consistent in that it's 'Apple centric' (not Apple exclusive though) and as for the 'tone' that will depend on the opinion of the writer.
Opinions are opinions. Trying to shoehorn them into one particular can of editorial lineage by marking a 'tone' would be a disservice IMO.
I'm going to be totally honest here: Using this thing for "productivity" in my work (application development) looks like a nightmare scenario. If I want/need more space, I'll get a second monitor.
As for entertainment? I'll watch movies on my large screen with my wife—and, occasionally, my extended family—by my side thank you very much.
VR? Eh.
There's an awful lot of wishful thinking surrounding this thing.
I probably have a similar set of pragmatic nuts & bolts level of concerns. It may sound trivial, but what’s the typing experience on the Vision Pro? I’m kind of a lousy touch typist. I don’t need to crank out 90 wpm but the typing experience still has to be comfortable and intuitive even if I have to look at the keyboard occasionally. The keyboard and mouse coordination is totally ingrained in my brain and something I don’t even think about. Things like text selection, cut, copy, paste, drag and drop, reformatting text, accessing context (right click) menus, shortcut keys, etc. I know you can use a physical keyboard with the Vision Pro, but what will this really feel like? I’ve never sat at a keyboard while wearing a helmet or face mask.
I can definitely see where having a near infinite palette, design surface, and desk space would be helpful for software design and debugging, especially if you don’t have luxury of being able to attach a 2nd or 3rd monitor to your workstation setup or you’re traveling or working away from the office, say at a job site. I’ve frequently used the iPad Pro as a 2nd monitor while traveling with a notebook computer.
I see a lot of conjecture about possible medical applications using future Vision Pro. These are all interesting ideas and I have little doubt that we’ll see applications for similar technology to Vision Pro in the medium to longer range timeframe. I just wouldn’t bet on Apple being the driving force behind the more elaborate scenarios. If you believe that Apple is struggling to build a car in the timeframes we are accustomed to seeing consumer products hit the market, the prospect of Apple taking on the type of challenges that domain immersed medical systems providers like Siemens, GE, Medtronic, etc., are currently doing seems far more daunting.
I think there are nearer term, even current, applications that the Vision Pro could serve in patient healthcare. For example, letting people who are undergoing dialysis, chemotherapy, and other lengthy and debilitating therapies may find some level of relief by being immersed in the kinds of experiences the Vision Pro offers.
It's not trivial if that's what you need to do to use it. All the reports show that typing is a poor experience. It's one of the reasons I wasn't able to move from Mac to an iPad as my primary computing device like a lot of other people I know.
I also don't want to use a physical keyboard with my AVP. With my Mac or any other device I can quickly glance down to see my keyboard. Will this be the same with AVP? Will I have to physically nod my head? I don't want to do that as it's already a weight on the front of my face. I'm hoping that my use case will be directed toward non-typing consumption. If it is a lot of typing — which Netflix expects you do via the browser if you want to watch their content with AVP after they purposely unchecked the perfectly good iPad app option (which I won't do) — then I'm likely going to return my headset because I couldn't find a decent use case.
"Apple's approach to motion tracking, environment passthrough, and other technologies will likely influence the entire industry. That's another win for Apple Vision Pro, a driver of innovation in a space that kept building the faster horse of VR."
There is nothing innovative in that and they are all areas that industry is working towards. The innovation side was thought through long ago. The problem was bringing it to market at a decent cost.
Most players have simply opted for a more affordable product and refrained from including technologies that increase costs that aren't absolutely necessary.
The whole 'spatial' idea isn't really new either but Apple has a habit of sticking names on things in an effort to differentiate. That is fine and they are not alone.
Realistically speaking every product lab out there is moving on a train with the same ultimate goals. The economics of reaching them and the technical barriers are very much present but will slowly come down and the best way Apple to speed that train up is through actually having a product in the real world to learn from.
There are other issues like AI overlapping with VR to create new moral and ethical dilemmas and potentially distort even further our perception of reality, and having these kinds of devices reach the market, in relatively small numbers, reduces the negative impact and allows for the authorities to better prepare for guidelines.
My wife used her Quest a lot while alone at home, even if 'a lot' really meant a couple of hours at a time due universally known limitations (battery life, heat, comfort).
Being able to improve the 'experience' in spec terms is a win. If she loved watching films on a Quest while sitting a few meters away from a Kuro plasma it speaks volumes for the immersive side of things.
Imagine what she'd do with a VP.
Obviously I'm not going to get her one at the current price and with all the limitations (apps, content, repair costs and whatnot) but its mere existence is a step in the right direction and from a non-user perspective, I still love the EyeSight feature even if it's one of the features most other players will take a pass on to reduce costs.
I'm going to be totally honest here: Using this thing for "productivity" in my work (application development) looks like a nightmare scenario. If I want/need more space, I'll get a second monitor.
As for entertainment? I'll watch movies on my large screen with my wife—and, occasionally, my extended family—by my side thank you very much.
VR? Eh.
There's an awful lot of wishful thinking surrounding this thing.
I probably have a similar set of pragmatic nuts & bolts level of concerns. It may sound trivial, but what’s the typing experience on the Vision Pro? I’m kind of a lousy touch typist. I don’t need to crank out 90 wpm but the typing experience still has to be comfortable and intuitive even if I have to look at the keyboard occasionally. The keyboard and mouse coordination is totally ingrained in my brain and something I don’t even think about. Things like text selection, cut, copy, paste, drag and drop, reformatting text, accessing context (right click) menus, shortcut keys, etc. I know you can use a physical keyboard with the Vision Pro, but what will this really feel like? I’ve never sat at a keyboard while wearing a helmet or face mask.
Bluetooth keyboards, mice, trackpads, game controllers in this first months or this software revision. Other Bluetooth accessories to come if sales go alright.
There are some questions on how the pointer appears. Will it just appear where you are looking once the mouse is touched? Then move at will, with it teleporting to different app displays as you move it? The text stuff will likely be like mouse support on iPads, which are the standard pointer UI events Apple uses, selection, copying, etc.
Since it is a passthrough headset, it's going to be like typing on a typical keyboard. You may have to tilt your head more while in the set to glance at the keyboard than without it on, but you are just typing on a physical keyboard and will be able to look at it if need be, be able to use your phone, tablets and other physical devices. It will have to be text above a certain size. Might have trouble with focal distance and strain on your eyes.
It's not going to have Mac apps as native, other as a remote desktop. iPad apps as native. That will be the bigger difference. The apps aren't going to have big pallets and toolbars full of buttons and menu options. On the brightside, if the Vision Pro is popular, iPad apps may finally have more features, but that's a problem with display space, and may not be solvable, other than having iPads with 12" to 15" displays, with external screens being more commonly used. An 11" iPad display? On the too small side for complicated apps.
What do you mean by dramatic? What changed in the operating system? How about some UI screenshots?
I use my Apple Watch as a notification device all the time. Phone calls, text message replays. That's not Digital Touch or sending heartbeats, but it is still communication, which was a tentpole type feature from the beginning. I basically use the Apple Watch in accordance to the original tentpoles: time, fitness, communication, and weather. Don't see any big changes.
You want me to do the research and gather screenshots from an operating system that existed nearly a decade ago because you don't understand my point? Yeah, sorry, no.
If you believe you're correct, go nuts. Or go look at the information yourself. It's not like I'm unique in my perspective since it's what happened.
What changed? The entire functionality of the operating system. How apps were loaded. What the buttons did. What data was obtained and processed on device versus on the phone. Native SDKs weren't even available until watchOS 2.
The platform got turned on its head. Go look into it, it's quite the fascinating history. Or don't, I don't care. lol
Burden of proof is one of the basic concepts in critical thought. Go take a logic class and it will be one of the first concepts covered.
In critical thought/logic the burden of proof is the responsibility of the person making the claim. In this case that is you. That you have declined to offer any proof and are falling back on “go look at the information yourself” just underscores how weak your argument is.
What do you mean by dramatic? What changed in the operating system? How about some UI screenshots?
I use my Apple Watch as a notification device all the time. Phone calls, text message replays. That's not Digital Touch or sending heartbeats, but it is still communication, which was a tentpole type feature from the beginning. I basically use the Apple Watch in accordance to the original tentpoles: time, fitness, communication, and weather. Don't see any big changes.
You want me to do the research and gather screenshots from an operating system that existed nearly a decade ago because you don't understand my point? Yeah, sorry, no.
If you believe you're correct, go nuts. Or go look at the information yourself. It's not like I'm unique in my perspective since it's what happened.
What changed? The entire functionality of the operating system. How apps were loaded. What the buttons did. What data was obtained and processed on device versus on the phone. Native SDKs weren't even available until watchOS 2.
The platform got turned on its head. Go look into it, it's quite the fascinating history. Or don't, I don't care. lol
Burden of proof is one of the basic concepts in critical thought. Go take a logic class and it will be one of the first concepts covered.
In critical thought/logic the burden of proof is the responsibility of the person making the claim. In this case that is you. That you have declined to offer any proof and are falling back on “go look at the information yourself” just underscores how weak your argument is.
An offhand comment in a casual conversation doesn't require evidence. Get over yourself. You're welcome to disbelieve someone, but no need to be a dick, ands it's probably ill-advised when the person you're being a dick to has moderation powers.
Just my 2 pence…. fascinating bit of kit, very well designed with the best of intentions… very expensive (out of my price range) but this is surely a big step in the direction of Holodecks from star trek…?
again, not a bad thing, makes me wonder how many people will get addicted to it as a tech and not leave their home for days and/or weeks
i also think its use in business is understated, imagine being on an assembly line, and being new, a application could be developed where you see whats in front of you and instructions on what to do appear and point to parts to put together, could cut training time down dramatically
however i also see the potential miss use as a big brother device in such a case with managers watching a live stream of what your doing (hopefully apples privacy wouldn't allow that)
its like dipping a toe into the future…. And i want one, but unfortunately being a minimum wage worker means its out of my reach for now
Burden of proof is one of the basic concepts in critical thought. Go take a logic class and it will be one of the first concepts covered.
In critical thought/logic the burden of proof is the responsibility of the person making the claim. In this case that is you. That you have declined to offer any proof and are falling back on “go look at the information yourself” just underscores how weak your argument is.
That's all well and good, but what people on the internet seem to always forget is:
1. this isn't debate class or any form of official discussion where burden of proof applies 2. I don't owe you anything. 3. this is easily verifiable information. The burden of proof is usually only required when the information isn't self evident.
I can present you with a couple links if you insist:
the updates in watchOS 2 and 3 are often discussed as full redesigns to how the device worked. So much about how the watch works today wasn't introduced until these releases.
besides, I don't think the disagreement was about what I said, but the magnitude of the change. And that is subjective.
the dumbest part of this entire exchange is there has always been a link on the term "watchOS 2" in the text taking you to a page that explains *the entire release history of watchOS*. But clearly that was too difficult to parse as "burden of proof" so I've added the watchOS 2 announcement link next to it. If you can't figure it out from there, I don't know what to tell you.
So close to launch I was expecting to see much more coverage in the press than I’ve seen.
We have had a fair bit of coverage on it. The infulencers Apple has anointed are waiting for NDAs to be lifted (that will come as one big media push), and the rest of us are waiting for ours to show up in the mail before we can really speak with authority on the subject. We do have an content roadmap planned around the launch
In short, you can expect the media machine to start working overtime in the coming week. We're just 6 days out from having them in our homes and in our hands
Burden of proof is one of the basic concepts in critical thought. Go take a logic class and it will be one of the first concepts covered.
In critical thought/logic the burden of proof is the responsibility of the person making the claim. In this case that is you. That you have declined to offer any proof and are falling back on “go look at the information yourself” just underscores how weak your argument is.
An offhand comment in a casual conversation doesn't require evidence. Get over yourself. You're welcome to disbelieve someone, but no need to be a dick, ands it's probably ill-advised when the person you're being a dick to has moderation powers.
Yeah...
I'm just going to point out that we try and cultivate a generally positive atmosphere here. Part of that is ensuring that people act and speak in a respectful manner. If you take issue with something then by all means please give us feedback, that's a big part of why we still have forums. We are happy to run corrections and address concerns based off that, especially if we got something wrong. If, however, you choose to engage in a manner which is openly antagonistic or disrespectful you are not only undermining your own goal by making people discount and ignore you, if persistent enough you are also putting your account at risk. We are under no obligation to entertain that kind of behavior.
I find the negative prognostications rather amusing, including the fretting about the price. Of course it’s expensive. Why wouldn’t it be given the money sunk into its development. The same people spend much more on Taylor Swift tickets, weed or Skip the Dishes every year. Next. Usage. This is going to be huge! From personal computing to industry, to social-media, to entertainment, to training of all sorts, to military usage, to porn - this is going to be a really big thing. The product exists. Now it is up to those with imagination and creativity to decide what they’ll use it for and hat they’ll produce for it. From a 360 view from the top of Mt. Everest that one can access in real time. Or the surface of the moon or mars? Come on. That’s huge. I worked at Apple retail in Toronto when the iPad was launched and nobody including me, could figure out what it would be used for. We had Macs and iPhones, who needed another screen? There more than a few blue comments regarding its name, as well. Boy, were we all wrong. This will be like that. They will sell every unit they can produce. Bet on it.
Please try not to quote the entire original article - Jason
so basically you try to convince that it's price is correct, WRONG, doesnt matter, the rest we can wait until 2025, i'm sure that Apple gonna release the "base model" and maybe drop the actual Pro,
Please try not to quote the entire original article - Jason
so basically you try to convince that it's price is correct, WRONG, doesnt matter, the rest we can wait until 2025, i'm sure that Apple gonna release the "base model" and maybe drop the actual Pro,
1) If you don't quote anything you're responding to you just come across as a schizophrenic yelling into the wind. So what comment from article are you referring?
So confusing to read this site lately. Depending on the writer, the Vision Pro is either the second coming or a total disaster. Isn't the job of the editor to have a consistent tone?
There is absolutely no obligation for the staff to agree on everything. It's ridiculous to assume that we have to, or need to have a "consistent tone" in editorial work.
Comments
same again in engineering who deal with weaving things in 3d space
10 million traders who deal in data dense and team communications to make eyesight a thing.
a few million each pilots, architects, and builders.
and many others who might be able it justify it for the few hours a day they might currently have a desktop for that focused work, research, practice.
50million potential users with very little effort and could easily be 3 to 4 times that.
if we say sales getting production to 1/2million units a quarter is going to be a push and say 3 to 4 year average replacement allowing for hand me downs. Apple are only servicing maybe only 10 to 20% of that potential market before fleet replacement sales kick in and growing market share will need production to kick up another gear.
I can definitely see where having a near infinite palette, design surface, and desk space would be helpful for software design and debugging, especially if you don’t have luxury of being able to attach a 2nd or 3rd monitor to your workstation setup or you’re traveling or working away from the office, say at a job site. I’ve frequently used the iPad Pro as a 2nd monitor while traveling with a notebook computer.
I see a lot of conjecture about possible medical applications using future Vision Pro. These are all interesting ideas and I have little doubt that we’ll see applications for similar technology to Vision Pro in the medium to longer range timeframe. I just wouldn’t bet on Apple being the driving force behind the more elaborate scenarios. If you believe that Apple is struggling to build a car in the timeframes we are accustomed to seeing consumer products hit the market, the prospect of Apple taking on the type of challenges that domain immersed medical systems providers like Siemens, GE, Medtronic, etc., are currently doing seems far more daunting.
I think there are nearer term, even current, applications that the Vision Pro could serve in patient healthcare. For example, letting people who are undergoing dialysis, chemotherapy, and other lengthy and debilitating therapies may find some level of relief by being immersed in the kinds of experiences the Vision Pro offers.
It is consistent in that it's 'Apple centric' (not Apple exclusive though) and as for the 'tone' that will depend on the opinion of the writer.
Opinions are opinions. Trying to shoehorn them into one particular can of editorial lineage by marking a 'tone' would be a disservice IMO.
I also don't want to use a physical keyboard with my AVP. With my Mac or any other device I can quickly glance down to see my keyboard. Will this be the same with AVP? Will I have to physically nod my head? I don't want to do that as it's already a weight on the front of my face. I'm hoping that my use case will be directed toward non-typing consumption. If it is a lot of typing — which Netflix expects you do via the browser if you want to watch their content with AVP after they purposely unchecked the perfectly good iPad app option (which I won't do) — then I'm likely going to return my headset because I couldn't find a decent use case.
The VP needs to exist for it to progress.
I do think this isn't particularly true though:
"Apple's approach to motion tracking, environment passthrough, and other technologies will likely influence the entire industry. That's another win for Apple Vision Pro, a driver of innovation in a space that kept building the faster horse of VR."
There is nothing innovative in that and they are all areas that industry is working towards. The innovation side was thought through long ago. The problem was bringing it to market at a decent cost.
Most players have simply opted for a more affordable product and refrained from including technologies that increase costs that aren't absolutely necessary.
The whole 'spatial' idea isn't really new either but Apple has a habit of sticking names on things in an effort to differentiate. That is fine and they are not alone.
Realistically speaking every product lab out there is moving on a train with the same ultimate goals. The economics of reaching them and the technical barriers are very much present but will slowly come down and the best way Apple to speed that train up is through actually having a product in the real world to learn from.
There are other issues like AI overlapping with VR to create new moral and ethical dilemmas and potentially distort even further our perception of reality, and having these kinds of devices reach the market, in relatively small numbers, reduces the negative impact and allows for the authorities to better prepare for guidelines.
My wife used her Quest a lot while alone at home, even if 'a lot' really meant a couple of hours at a time due universally known limitations (battery life, heat, comfort).
Being able to improve the 'experience' in spec terms is a win. If she loved watching films on a Quest while sitting a few meters away from a Kuro plasma it speaks volumes for the immersive side of things.
Imagine what she'd do with a VP.
Obviously I'm not going to get her one at the current price and with all the limitations (apps, content, repair costs and whatnot) but its mere existence is a step in the right direction and from a non-user perspective, I still love the EyeSight feature even if it's one of the features most other players will take a pass on to reduce costs.
There are some questions on how the pointer appears. Will it just appear where you are looking once the mouse is touched? Then move at will, with it teleporting to different app displays as you move it? The text stuff will likely be like mouse support on iPads, which are the standard pointer UI events Apple uses, selection, copying, etc.
Since it is a passthrough headset, it's going to be like typing on a typical keyboard. You may have to tilt your head more while in the set to glance at the keyboard than without it on, but you are just typing on a physical keyboard and will be able to look at it if need be, be able to use your phone, tablets and other physical devices. It will have to be text above a certain size. Might have trouble with focal distance and strain on your eyes.
It's not going to have Mac apps as native, other as a remote desktop. iPad apps as native. That will be the bigger difference. The apps aren't going to have big pallets and toolbars full of buttons and menu options. On the brightside, if the Vision Pro is popular, iPad apps may finally have more features, but that's a problem with display space, and may not be solvable, other than having iPads with 12" to 15" displays, with external screens being more commonly used. An 11" iPad display? On the too small side for complicated apps.
fascinating bit of kit, very well designed with the best of intentions…
very expensive (out of my price range) but this is surely a big step in the direction of Holodecks from star trek…?
again, not a bad thing, makes me wonder how many people will get addicted to it as a tech and not leave their home for days and/or weeks
i also think its use in business is understated, imagine being on an assembly line, and being new, a application could be developed where you see whats in front of you and instructions on what to do appear and point to parts to put together, could cut training time down dramatically
however i also see the potential miss use as a big brother device in such a case with managers watching a live stream of what your doing (hopefully apples privacy wouldn't allow that)
its like dipping a toe into the future…. And i want one, but unfortunately being a minimum wage worker means its out of my reach for now
1. this isn't debate class or any form of official discussion where burden of proof applies
2. I don't owe you anything.
3. this is easily verifiable information. The burden of proof is usually only required when the information isn't self evident.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/16/09/13/everything-you-need-to-know-about-watchos-3-for-apple-watch
the updates in watchOS 2 and 3 are often discussed as full redesigns to how the device worked. So much about how the watch works today wasn't introduced until these releases.
besides, I don't think the disagreement was about what I said, but the magnitude of the change. And that is subjective.
the dumbest part of this entire exchange is there has always been a link on the term "watchOS 2" in the text taking you to a page that explains *the entire release history of watchOS*. But clearly that was too difficult to parse as "burden of proof" so I've added the watchOS 2 announcement link next to it. If you can't figure it out from there, I don't know what to tell you.
We have had a fair bit of coverage on it. The infulencers Apple has anointed are waiting for NDAs to be lifted (that will come as one big media push), and the rest of us are waiting for ours to show up in the mail before we can really speak with authority on the subject. We do have an content roadmap planned around the launch
In short, you can expect the media machine to start working overtime in the coming week. We're just 6 days out from having them in our homes and in our hands
Yeah...
I'm just going to point out that we try and cultivate a generally positive atmosphere here. Part of that is ensuring that people act and speak in a respectful manner. If you take issue with something then by all means please give us feedback, that's a big part of why we still have forums. We are happy to run corrections and address concerns based off that, especially if we got something wrong. If, however, you choose to engage in a manner which is openly antagonistic or disrespectful you are not only undermining your own goal by making people discount and ignore you, if persistent enough you are also putting your account at risk. We are under no obligation to entertain that kind of behavior.
Food for thought.
2) What exactly is "WRONG" about the price?