Xed

pulseimages said:

Tower72 said:

As someone that ping ponged between iPhone and Androids since 2007 (currently with iPhone for a few phone models now and 15PM), let the consumer do what they want BUT add a disclaimer. If they install a 3rd party app outside of the App store and their phone goes all wonky on the software side,  Apple will NOT fix it and the consumer has to accept responsibility .  I have rooted all of my Android phones and jailbroke my old iPhones in the past, knowing full well that my actions could have consequences and I could install something that I probably should not.  I dig the walled garden approach Apple has but honestly, I do miss the freedom I had with Android devices sometimes and if my devices ever went nuts, I simply restored from a backup and lesson learned. 

Still though I think this is a scare tactic, as installing things from outside of the official app store, will cut into Apples profits. 

Except this generation has been taught that nothing is their fault and there’s always someone else to blame. 

OK Boomer.  It sounds like you're denying all the issues the older generations caused that the younger generations are constantly fighting to resolve. Climate change, housing market, Roe v Wade, social security, immigration, Citizens United v. FEC, and on and on and on.

https://www.businessinsider.com/boomer-greed-ruined-economy-gen-z-millennials-labor-shortage-inflation-2023-3?op=1

It's likely an engineering choice. The headset itself doesn't have a battery.

They still could've allowed it to send it's location when it is powered on.

I don't see that. I'd liken it to being more like the original Mac launch since it's very expensive with most people still wondering what they could possibly do with this bleeding edge tech. 

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

This is Apple getting high on its own delusions.

It's understandable but still ridiculous. 

Anybody that thinks only 'they' could do something really needs to rethink things. 

I’m pretty sure they are correct when they say only Apple could have created the Apple Vision Pro.

It's not like VR/AR is a newly invented product category. We've seen what others have been doing and they've all fallen short of making something great or even good. It's all simply been mediocre in the consumer space. Even if Avon B7 wants to argue that others don't charge as much as Apple (which isn't even true for MS HoloLens) so the tech specs and build quality would obviously have to lower, he'd still have to wrestle with why Apple can charge a premium price for state-of-the-art components which comes right back around to it being only something Apple can do in the consumer space.

MS HoloLens does have the premium price and their specs are (mostly) better than Meta Quest but fall very short of AVP's, but MS isn't marketing HoloLens to the consumer market. Now that Apple has cleared a path which legitimizes the VR/AR market for mass consumption — just like Blackberry phones saw their largest sales boom after the iPhone was released even though their ultimate collapse was already sealed. I fully expect to see Quest come out with better tech in a more expensive VR headset and more R&D put in by every competitor to better compete with and try to shave off VR sales scraps from Apple.

Another way of looking at it is taking a gander at what HW and SW are used in other VR/AR headsets. Even with the MS HoloLens price that starts higher than what Apple sells AVP for, they're still using Qualcomm Snapdragon 850 or Intel Atom for their CPU. Not exactly the Apple Silicon M2 with LPDDR5 RAM. So if not Apple, what company has both the vertical and horizontal integration to have efficiently created something that is on the same level of visionOS and AVP HW? I can't think of one.

That's not entirely true. Huawei and Samsung can do it... after they get ahold of Apple's designs and tech specs.