chutzpah

anonymouse said:

chutzpah said:

anonymouse said:

danox said:

twolf2919 said:

Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success.  This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this.  When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k?  Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then.   Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal.  And  Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone.  And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.

The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.

Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.

Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook? 

I'll bet the number who said that is in the single digits, if it's even above 0.  "All the analysts" my butt.

I'll bet you are too young to even know what a netbook is, or too old to remember.

anonymouse said:

danox said:

twolf2919 said:

Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success.  This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this.  When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k?  Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then.   Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal.  And  Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone.  And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.

The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.

Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.

Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook? 

danox said:

chutzpah said:

danox said:

mattinoz said:

danox said:

mattbookair said:

So, if the headset appears, surely it will not be intended for sale to the public, but rather a developer model … hence the higher price etc. I think this underlies the price confusion: Yes, the developer edition will be $1-2K, but the public release model a year or so later will be much more affordable, and there will then be a range of 3rd party Apps to make it a more compelling product. 

Since when has Apple done that? Apple will set the price at a profitable price and let the buying commence, the key for its success will be the same as everything else Apple has released in the last 25 years, the software and the hardware must be integrated in a way, that makes people want to use it, and say here take my money.

PS if you own Apple shares keep them, if you don’t, you may want to buy a few before the end of the week, of course, there are no guarantees of anything.

Also Apple could have made a cheaper iPhone in the beginning but they used gorilla glass in the design of the iPhone, that might be another reason why the price will be the price, but with Tim Cook, who knows?

https://www.inc.com/jeff-haden/how-steve-jobs-used-7-words-to-inspire-a-major-breakthrough.html

Every new Apple platform for Developers has had a dev kit for the hardware or a priority purchase scheme for dev's. No point the general public having something there is no software for.  

In recent times two other companies, Google and Meta failed, with a beta glasses/goggles developers kit releases, do you think Apple can have such a release with the software not done and the hardware not quite finished? The Apple Maps release for example, wasn’t good wasn’t finished and someone high up lost their job because they wouldn’t apologize. I think Apple will be held to a far higher standard than Google or Meta. The Apple hardware has to be done, and the software has to be usable and functional out the door. (The Apple is doomed alarm will sound irregardless)

Note: The price will be too high according to the experts, and the financial analysts, no matter what Apple does, so the price might as well be set at, what you plan on selling it at for a profit, ie.. just like the iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and AirPods before.

Why do you say that Meta failed, and imply that their hardware wasn't good and wasn't finished?  Their Quest line is a pretty polished product, and the market leader so far.

The Metaverse concept may have been a bit of a damp squib, but that's a separate thing.

Meta-has failed. They are not capable of doing hardware and software (no OS) as one at Apple’s level, if Apple pulls it off Meta, Google, and Microsoft will be left gasping on fumes, crying about the so-called non Apple monopoly, along with the EU, if the Apple device is anywhere close to what is shown in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_quBMFEPTE

joogabah said:

chutzpah said:

So mean of the USA!  Bombing peaceful neighbouring countries is much more polite.

No hypocrisy there at all.  America never bombs other countries or invades and topples other governments, even on false pretexts.  And America had nothing to do with Ukraine's 2014 coup either.  And it didn't state explicitly its plan to balkanize Russia as a prelude to war with China which it can't compete against.

danox said:

mattinoz said:

danox said:

mattbookair said:

So, if the headset appears, surely it will not be intended for sale to the public, but rather a developer model … hence the higher price etc. I think this underlies the price confusion: Yes, the developer edition will be $1-2K, but the public release model a year or so later will be much more affordable, and there will then be a range of 3rd party Apps to make it a more compelling product. 

Since when has Apple done that? Apple will set the price at a profitable price and let the buying commence, the key for its success will be the same as everything else Apple has released in the last 25 years, the software and the hardware must be integrated in a way, that makes people want to use it, and say here take my money.

PS if you own Apple shares keep them, if you don’t, you may want to buy a few before the end of the week, of course, there are no guarantees of anything.

Also Apple could have made a cheaper iPhone in the beginning but they used gorilla glass in the design of the iPhone, that might be another reason why the price will be the price, but with Tim Cook, who knows?

https://www.inc.com/jeff-haden/how-steve-jobs-used-7-words-to-inspire-a-major-breakthrough.html

Every new Apple platform for Developers has had a dev kit for the hardware or a priority purchase scheme for dev's. No point the general public having something there is no software for.  

In recent times two other companies, Google and Meta failed, with a beta glasses/goggles developers kit releases, do you think Apple can have such a release with the software not done and the hardware not quite finished? The Apple Maps release for example, wasn’t good wasn’t finished and someone high up lost their job because they wouldn’t apologize. I think Apple will be held to a far higher standard than Google or Meta. The Apple hardware has to be done, and the software has to be usable and functional out the door. (The Apple is doomed alarm will sound irregardless)

Note: The price will be too high according to the experts, and the financial analysts, no matter what Apple does, so the price might as well be set at, what you plan on selling it at for a profit, ie.. just like the iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and AirPods before.