gilly33

Kierkegaarden said:

I have a suggestion for these lunatics — make your own product, and sell it the way you want to.

danox said:

jfabula1 said:

JP234 said:

There should be, somewhere out there, a market analysis to determine the point of diminishing returns comparing markup/volume ratios.

"From" $3499 is too expensive for what VisionPro represents at this time. Yeah, I'm impressed with it. A lot. Am I impressed enough to buy one without asking, "Will this add $3,500 (or more) of value to my work or home life?" The answer is, right now VP offers nothing that is unavailable in some other, albeit less impressive format. Yet. There are plenty of ways to spend "from" $3,500 (plus tax, lens correction and AppleCare) that would equal or surpass the benefit I'd derive from a headset.

Dump the floating windows. The market for VP as a work tool is too niche. The transparency feature seems impressive at first, but you could also just take them off when you want to talk to someone in the room. Is that worth an extra whatever? And why do we need to create an artificial representation of ourselves NOT wearing the headset when using Facetime? Let your contacts see that you're wearing them, and envy you. Or take them off.

Do what's necessary to get the price to $1,999, and add an eSIM. Now there's mass market appeal. Keep the $3,499 model for the upscale customer, call it VisionPro Ultra or something so they'll have something to brag about.

That price is worth my one month mortgage payment, definitely not for me. I will be outside looking IN. 

Then invest that 3,500 dollars into buying Apple shares, and in the time that it would take to complete a four-year degree you can buy five Apple Vision Pros at the end or just continue investing, stop thinking short term. 

Also note if you had invested that same $3500 just after Apple 7 to 1 split and just added just 10 shares per year through the 4 to 1 split and just kept on investing, you would be in a position to buy 20 Apple Vision Pros today.

Xed said:

9secondkox2 said:

Looks horrible. Total bill gates need level. Non even resembles apple design. Wastes battery with the outside screen. 

And you wear the thing from your head to your waist? Serious? 

Looks like it was meant to be glasses but apple wanted to rush it out before the glasses could be feasible. 

Looks like a solution looking for a problem. 

Actually could be a problem. !!!!!  that this product is announced right after Sumbul Dasani addresses the problems of having a screen too close to your eyes - and this thing puts the screen less than an inch away. 

Not compelling. But a fun toy. 

At least they got a Jony Ive soundalike to talk about the “design.” LOL

Iger talking up these amazing new experiences that are just vague ideas, but ending with the reality: “oh. Um. Disney plus.” Pretty sad. So far, not really different use cases than other devices.

Essh! Lambasting the entire concept before the reveal video is even complete and before you've even used one.

As for the sentence I've underlined, those other devices aren't adjusting their screens for he closeness of the display, whereas the Apple Vision Pro is designed knowing exactly how far away it is to the user in a physical sense and is designed to trick the brain into thinking objects are much further away. There is a massive difference—it's not subtle.