Xed

designr said:

Xed said:

thrang said:

He's superficially correct - but he seems to be missing (purposely or not) the relatively meaningless cost to be an early-marquee app for their longer term benefit, and shorter term marketing attention.

Also probably not interested in "helping" a streaming competitor, but why give up eyeballs (literal, marketing, and news cycle) for no reason?

Disney was smarter here.

As Cpsro points out, the default state would be to allow their iPad app to work on AVP. They had to actively disable that feature so you can't simply install the iPad app on AVP. The only reason for this is try to hurt the success of AVP. 

Is that the only reason? Really? Is it possible they did not want to have to incur the support costs that might come from any issues associated with running that app with Vision Pro? Maybe something else?

Not everything is a conspiracy.

That said, maybe you're right. Then we'd need to wonder why Netflix might choose to do that for that reason. What, if anything, has Apple done to earn that kind of response? Is it possible that Apple has pissed in Netflix's cereal in some way? Nah. Apple is always the white-hat-wearing Good Guy™ and everyone who doesn't fall in line is the black-hat-wearing Bad Guy™.

thrang said:

He's superficially correct - but he seems to be missing (purposely or not) the relatively meaningless cost to be an early-marquee app for their longer term benefit, and shorter term marketing attention.

Also probably not interested in "helping" a streaming competitor, but why give up eyeballs (literal, marketing, and news cycle) for no reason?

Disney was smarter here.

alandail said:

Xed said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

alandail said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

bluefire1 said:

cpsro said:

IMHO the iPhone was a success from the very beginning--even before it was in customer hands. Google recognized it, too.

Agree. in 2008, the iPhone was already the fourth best selling mobile device in the country, as people continued to replace their mobile phones with this innovative disruptive device. 

People need mobile devices, but who needs the Vision Pro and why? Time will tell.

Yeah. It launched into a market that already had successes and very clear use cases for the everyman. AVP is launching into a market that doesn't.

you're not thinking long term. 

This Apple's 3rd new computing platform that changed the way people use computers

Macintosh
iPhone
Vision Pro

Macintosh in 1984. There were barely any apps, but it redefined how computers worked. At my job (NASA), we started buying them a day after release and for the next year or two we bought 1 of every app that came out to see what we could use it for. That's how few apps there were. It had the minimum hardware necessary to make that user interface work and cost $2499 ($7238 in today's dollars). 

40 years later, all computers work like that Macintosh.  

iPhone in 2007 - here weren't any apps other than the ones Apple built. There was no 3rd party App Store for a full year after release. Again had the minimum hardware necessary to make that user interface work. Redefined how mobile computing worked. Today all phones and tablets work like that first iPhone. The pointing device from the Mac was replace by your finger.

Vision Pro -  At release it's already well ahead  in apps of where Macintosh and iPhone were. Like Macintosh, it's the minimum hardware required to implement a new way to use computes. Augmented reality. To nail augmented reality, it has to look like reality. The pointing device is now your eyes. Like Macintosh, the first release is expensive. And the first release is heavy. But something went seriously wrong if 5 to 10 years from now devices that descend from or are inspired by Vision Pro aren't the dominate computing platform.

Imagine a future model that isn't much bigger or heavier than sunglasses, shows your eyes while you use it, has all day battery life, had robust AI, has fully shared experiences with other people if they're in the room with you or not, and runs every app you need. What do you even need a phone for with a device like that? What do you need a computer for? 

I absolutely am thinking long term. From the article:

No matter how many units are available, sold, or coming in early 2024, no matter how loud Apple yells that the Apple Vision Pro is a success now, no matter if the stock analysts predict doom or triumph now, the whole-year 2024 is only the start of the saga and climb. I agree with the sentiment that Apple Vision Pro is right now in essence a paid developer kit unleashed on the world. 

From the start, developers are the crank or starter motor that starts the big engine, and users are the fuel that makes the product run. Apple hopes the killer app will pop out, as it has before, but nothing is guaranteed.

This is a story told in the fullness of time. This is a story told in the non-Pro Apple Vision, and whatever the "Apple Glass" ultimately turns out to be. 
This is also a story about how the rest of the world reacts to the hardware, and what competing vendors do in response to the gear. Meta's, HTC's, and others' responses and timelines will perhaps be the most telling on how afraid the rest of the market is.

As far as the absolute measure of success goes, Apple can wait effectively forever. It doesn't need to be profitable out of the gate, as the company has a stack of money that would make the most covetous dragon jealous to weather the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune with little or no impact to the company as a whole."

I do hope we see an AR-only product down the road, but I do wonder what that might look like since Google Glass was panned so heavily — and rightly so — for being creepy.  I feel like the only way around that is to remove the external cameras from an AR-only device so that surreptitious video recording can't occur; or, does Apple's credibility with personal security over Google, plus 11+ years of putting high-performance cameras in everyone's pockets changed  how we feel about such products as a society?

How is that any different than the billions of phones? they can be recording at any time too. And the solution is easy, just show a little red light like computers do when their camera is on. Phones don't have that light and everyone is okay with them.