twolf2919

Not a very convincing article.   The author has no evidence that Apple is actually readying a ring.  Sure, Apple has been filing patents for ring-like devices for years, but it does that even when it has no current plans for one.  It's called research. 

Anecdotally - my wife and I upgraded from iPhone 15 Pro Maxes 8 days ago - the 16 Pro Max is actually doing worse.  Regularly now, by bed time our phones are 30% full whereas our 15 Pro Maxes were around 50% under same usage.  At first I thought it’s the usual initial battery drain as the data/apps/etc get downloaded again - and, maybe this time, some AI stuff gets initialized with data on our phones, but it’s now day 8 - and battery use still hasn’t recovered on either of our phones.  Ergo, battery is worse - at least for us - on the new phones.

StrangeDays said:

Kuo has absolutely no business insight into Apple strategy, pricing discussion, or decision-making. He only has leaking supply chain contacts. There’s zero way he can know what Apple is thinking strategically years in the future.

Correction: he's got supply chain insights/contacts *and* common sense.  The latter alone enables anyone to forecast dismal sales for a $3500 toy with no mass market use case- no matter how good the experience.  He's, of course, purely guessing with regards to Vision Pro 2 coming out in the 2027 timeframe.  I'd submit that by that timeframe, Apple will have woken up and realized that Apple Glasses will be the only gadget with truly mass market appeal.  It is this product that everybody was hoping for in 2023 instead of the techno-tour-de-force that is Vision Pro.  Coincidentally, after the VP came out, there were rumors that Apple Glass had been pushed back to....2027 or so.

If true, congratulations Apple, you’re on your way to doing what you should have done in the first place: rely on the computer already in people’s pockets.  Next up, drop the “VR” bit, letting the headset into glasses.   Voilá, you’ve turned your dud of a product into a guaranteed mass market success.

rob53 said:

Could be a great replacement for a large screen TV. No glare. Great for small apartments. 

Seeing the 3D scanning of your face makes me wonder when 3D scanning apps using the front cameras/LiDAR will come out allowing scanning of “things” imported into 3D CAD systems. High quality handheld scanners are expensive. 

Uh, would be interesting to see how you share that 'large screen tv' with others :-)

In essence, Trump is going to hold court and whoever kisses his aXX the best gets the exemption.  Better pucker up Tim - take one for the shareholders.

This, if it comes to pass, is the President of the United States getting to decide who are the winners and who are the losers.  I guess letting the 'free market' decide is not required in this new Banana Republic.

For what it's worth, I challenge the assumption that Apple is most deserving of protection because it "is so reliant on China".  There are 34 MILLION small and medium sized businesses in the US, many of which are just as reliant - if not more so - on parts and/or products from China.  And this 145% tariff is going to have a much more immediate devastating effect on them than it does on a giant corporation like AAPL.  Little dollar stores don't have the 39% margin cushion Apple enjoys with its devices and, more importantly, they don't have $50+b in cash they can rely on to weather this tariff storm.

Apple Pay itself has always been a joy to use - but Apple Wallet is annoying to no end.  Once again today, I see a notification badge with a number in it on the wallet icon.  But the  app is so poorly written that, once you go into the Wallet, you have no idea which card caused the notification!   This poor user interface has been there forever :-(  And where is the global search?  I realize Wallet is for more than just credit cards, but come on! - why can't I do a keyword search across all cards?  E.g. if I recall buying a pair of jeans but can't remember which credit card I used, I have to manually go into each card and search individual transaction histories (usually by scrolling as none of the credit cards I have, other than Apple Card,  even has a search function!)

Other than that - I'm a happy camper with Apple Pay.

" ...but that could be less about CarPlay, and more about how owners are so unhappy with infotainment systems provided by car makers" - I don't think that's the case.  By all accounts, Rivian's and Tesla's infotainment systems are very nice.  The problem with all manufacturers' infotainment systems is that they fundamentally can't provide the same level of service as either CarPlay or Android Auto because they don't have access to all the information contained on our phones!  How will Rivian ever manage to automatically suggest directions to the dental appointment I have in my calendar?   The difference is only going to get more stark as Apple rolls out its AI to Siri.  As stupid as Siri currently is, it's already way better than the car's "assistant" - and once Siri becomes more conversational and be able to draw on even more user data (via the models being run on-device), there will be no contest.

Tesla claims to be on the AI bandwagon as well - but it, nor any of the other car manufacturers, have free access to the data on our phones.  Only CarPlay and Android Auto do.   I especially wish Rivian's CEO was more customer-centric as I really like their vehicles.  The guy is smart and should understand this basic issue - his counterpart at Ford has summarized it quite nicely "...the train [of who should provide the infotainment system] has left the station years ago."  Rivian and Tesla (and now GM) just can't see past their greed (future revenue from tying their customers to in-car subscription services).

The author didn't really make a case at all.  I still don't know how how the AVP is supposed to be similar to the AW.   In the case of AW, Apple merely changed the "positioning" - i.e. the marketing - of the watch.  But the watch always had a decent price point and a decent set of hardware features that were well integrated with the iPhone.  The AVP needs way more than a change of marketing to succeed.   First and foremost, it needs to cost 1/3 of what it goes for now.  It needs to lose that atrocious battery appendage and chord.  It needs to let its wearer blend into the crowd rather than make them look like complete dorks.  In other words, it needs to become something completely different to become a mass market (and business) success for Apple- the AR glasses Tim Cook originally promised 3-4 years ago!  Or the AVP will always remain a niche product.

A remarkably wordy article that ultimately doesn't answer the question its title poses.  What is the point, really, in stating that the killer app will use features X, Y, or Z in Vision Pro?  Isn't it obvious that this is the reason Apple put those features into the Vision Pro?

The article does mention use cases such as  the possibility of  immersive attendance to live events.  But isn't the point of attending a live event that you're there 'live' with thousands of fellow attendees?  It's a social thing!  How many people would give up this social aspects of attending an event - and pay $3,500 for the 'privilege'?  It's a pretty dystopian scenario, if you ask me.    The same goes for the argument that the Vision Pro replaces a large-screen TV - it conveniently forgets that watching TV is, for many, a social activity.  No, we don't have watch parties every day, but most couples or families watch the news, TV shows or movies together.  A single $3.5k Vision Pro can't provide the same experience as a $1k large screen TV in that regard.  And I don't think anyone would buy multiple VPs to have everyone in the family sitting isolated on the couch.  Seems even lonelier than today's reality, where people are in the same room, but everyone's absorbed by the content of their smartphones.  But at least with smartphones, it's a simple movement of the head to begin interaction with another human.

Don't get me wrong - I'm a strident believer in the future of AR.   But AR will only become a mass market success when it no longer interferes with human interactions.  Goggles on your head definitely don't do the trick.  I think Apple jumped the shark with this AR "wannabe" VR headset.  I'm not sure why developers - especially small ones - would write software, i.e. potential killer apps, for it when Apple has given no timeline for a device (the vaunted AR glasses) that will have mass market appeal and thus provide a return on their investment.