Xed

dewme said:

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

This is shocking news. You mean to tell me that real people are actually deciding for themselves whether the Vision Pro is something they want to continue to be part of their lives? I would have figured they would simply accept what they read and hear from tech pundits as guidance for what they must do with their personal purchases. 

The Vision Pro will live or die based on the value it delivers to people who buy it. There’s no reason to defend it or denigrate it, especially if you have no skin in the game. 

I think defending it is OK as long as it's a realistic, balanced defence and not a knee-jerk reaction against any criticism. 

I can't see any valid reason to denigrate it though.

No VR/AR/XR product is ticking all the boxes to make it truly a 'must have' everyday item for consumers. 

They are all running into the same well trodden issues. That is reasonable because it's a tough nut to crack with current technologies

The key is that the industry as a whole is moving forward and knows full well where it wants to go.

In that sense, upping the specs is definitely a plus, even if it comes at a price. The user will decide if the overall outlay justifies the purchase. 

Returns are part of that process and YouTubers are part of that. It's nothing new. 

On a wider note there is room for discussion on other areas which are again, well trodden. 

For example, if traction via app creation is a business goal, then enticing developers to create native apps would be aided by having more devices to write for. 

That begs the question of how long until a Vision SE without some bells and whistles? 

There are rumours, but a sub $1,000, lower resolution, lower material quality, Eyesight-less device with controllers might have kick started the platform. 

I'm very sure that was put on the table (and might still be there) but was voted down for 'comparative' reasons. 

The upshot though, is that there are pros and cons to all the different strategies but everyone wins (down the road) if the product is put to market. That is the best route and cuts down on the time for it to become more consumer friendly with regards to price. 

I mostly agree, but I’m more inclined to say the Vision Pro (or its accessories) does not need to be defended. It defends itself through the process of people buying it and staying with it wherever it goes. It’s a very personal product that needs to be evaluated at a very personal level. I’m not here try to either convince or dissuade anyone who hasn’t already jumped on it or decided that it wasn’t quite right for them. People should make up their own minds for themselves. Your own experience with the product is the only thing that matters. Give it a try and see where that leads you.

visciousp said:

Cool article.  First one I've seen that even attempts to collect real data.   AVP is flawed, but I'm keeping mine.  The flaws bother me, but the tech is years ahead of anything like it (sorry zuck)

macxpress said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

mikethemartian said:

You don’t necessarily have to return the item in person to the store today. You just need to go online or call and submit an RMA request.

Right. This is mostly covered in the piece, minus the RMA details.

Fact remains, retail gets a lot of online purchase returns and historically it has not been the other way around.

And it makes sense that people would take it to the store to return it regardless of how they originally purchased it. So much easier and quicker for the customer. I would think Apple would prefer this as well.