danvm

danox said:

avon b7 said:

charlesn said:

avon b7 said:

The device was designed to be expensive without being impossibly expensive. That was to get best in class features into many areas of it.

Meta took the opposite approach and designed for a larger market base. 

Both approaches are perfectly fine. 

I will disagree and say that Meta's approach has done nothing but generate more than ten YEARS of massive losses. As of last quarter, Reality Labs is losing about $56 million per DAY, 24/7/365, or roughly $1.67 billion per month, $5 billion per quarter. And they've been at this for a decade, never making a penny. That "business" is only "perfectly fine" because Zuck makes so much money monetizing your data and consumer privacy to any willing buyer. The dude is like a festering scab on the skin of America. 

The executive side of things in terms of the financials is seperate to the final consumer offering. 

In that sense, what arrives in the hands of consumers, and the price/quality balance are all that matter. 

No Quest user is concerned about the impact of product development costs. 

The Meta approach gave it a decade of user feedback and, in broad terms, first mover status as we have always known that the first steps were going to be very 'local' affairs.

The advent of 5.5G and 6G will open the door to more offline processing and a more immersive XR experience. 

Meta is very well positioned in that regard and Mark Zuckerberg has stated that losses were (and still are) always part of the approach. Obviously, at some point, that should swing into profit if their plan plays out. Especially with the incorporation of non-visor products. 

Apple is no doubt also losing money on the VP but in a more controlled fashion. Its plans have been very niche until now and are limited to a visor based product. 

Many seem to have a wish that Apple is losing money on the Apple Vision Pro, but they are indifferent to the fact that Apples largest acquisition to date only cost them 3 billion dollars. Apple has shown repeatedly over the years that they don’t waste billions like their competitors. 

In AI some even think/hope that Apple is behind in AI and is losing money at it. But Apple is not giving OpenAI any money in their partnership, OpenAI is but a blip a small feature within Apple Intelligence. Ask Microsoft about their relationship with OpenAI they have wasted billions as usual with their sponsorship of OpenAI, the other companies that Apple is in competition with Meta and Google have also wasted sizable sums of money in the billions sponsoring Nvidia’s overpriced/hardware, and now because of open source DeepSeek the moat that each company thought they were building around AI has been crushed.

What’s interesting? Is that Apple because of Apple Silicon, Apple OS with Apple Intelligence being the overall framework for any third party AI solution, including possibly their own in the future, all of these so-called AI solutions will just be little replaceable features within Apple OS, Apple isn’t behind in AI or in financing, they can stop on a dime and go into any direction it chooses in comparison to their competition, however their competition has already squandered billions on the idea that they were going to have a exclusive moat at the top of the AI pyramid that dream is shattered.

As usual many of the tech analysts and financial gurus have been trying to spin the release of open source DeepSeek into a negative thrown Apples way on the Seeking Alpha financial website and at the same time they are also avoiding the subject of Apples masterstroke of, not giving OpenAI one penny for their now moat less AI solution.

First of all, Apple is behind the competition in AI. That's not hard to see.

Second, the way Apple and Microsoft work with OpenAI is quite different. Apple has ChatGPT as a feature on their devices, but Microsoft has really integrated OpenAI into a lot of their products like MS Office, Dynamics, and Visual Studio. Plus, they have Copilot Chat for both personal and business use.

Microsoft also uses OpenAI through Azure with their Azure OpenAI Services. TikTok is one of their biggest customers, paying around $20 million a month for these services. A lot of businesses and enterprises are using this service too.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/31/24210667/microsoft-tiktok-ai-openai-customer

Microsoft has invested a lot in OpenAI, which has led to big improvements in their products and services. On the other hand, Apple's investment was zero, resulting in a feature that might not be as impactful for their customers.

It looks like Microsoft's investment has brought more benefits to their customers compared to Apple's approach, don't you think?

applesauce007 said:

macxpress said:

Apple apparently cares about your Privacy, yet it continues to use Google as its default search engine. This is purely a financial decision only. 

Apple does care about your privacy, that's why you get prompted to allow certain things like cookies that lead to advertising or not.

In terms of financial decision, I am sure financial is a factor for Apple just like it is for others like Bing, DuckDuckGo and Yahoo.
If it was not a factor, the losing search engines would not be complaining to the DOJ.  They want to make money and keep all the profit 

danox said:

bulk001 said:

Judge it like you would any release by say Microsoft and the answer is that it is not just a flop but it has also taken resources away from other projects (like fixing Siri, meaningful iPhones updates instead of the iterative creep we have been getting) and vision (pun alert) from developing new products or services. Apple is very reliant on iPhone sales for their revenue and vision has done nothing to change that. 

Apple is in a far better position than Microsoft who wasted $72.5 billion dollars on a game content company (Blizzard) how is Apple at a disadvantage when they can leverage a in house OS to go with in house hardware? Microsoft bought Blizzard in the worst possible way you can, you know where you buy a company and you don’t have much of an idea on what you’re gonna do. 

So you’re gonna try to fit it in later which leads to mass layoffs of personnel which they are currently in the process of doing. (Apple‘s largest acquisition to date is only $3 billion dollars acquiring Beats. Apple is hardly a company wasting money like Microsoft or Google the numbers over the years just don’t even come close when compared to their main competition.

danox said:

The Apple Vision is in the same position as the original iPhone, Apple Watch and the iPad, for the next four or five years, sites like Verge and many other tech sites will write over and over again how Apple Vision is doomed but the competition is ahead or is going to catch up real soon now, Apple should just give up also very similar to the sentiment about Apple replacing Intel CPU’s or Qualcomm modems which is next up for replacement by Apple.

Iteration over time will determine the winners and the losers in the so-called the AI wars, in this war of AI the winner can’t do it without in-house hardware design and engineering combined with an in house OS currently who has those capabilities now?

melgross said:

danvm said:

danox said:

Google and Meta sell you to the highest bidder for profit, Apple like most retailers gets all the information from you (about you) when you buy something from them to complete a mutual transaction, Google and Meta have to dig into the cesspool/trashcan (internet) to get the same information thru Spy-net. 

Many people can’t grasp the how you make your money determines everything that you do afterwards in terms of how you conduct your business going forward, Google and Meta are night and day different from Apple and no amount of me too or feel good products or giveaways will change that.

Didn't Apple sold their customers to Google when they agree to make Google Search the default search engine in every Apple device?  It looks like Apple get some billions from Google business practices, right?

No, they didn’t. All it gives Google is the default position as the search engine. You can easily change it to another.