Last Active
  • Decade-old Apple Car project may be completely dead


    Throughout all these years, even while reading article after article about it, I knew deep down in my heart that this "rumor" was little more than that.  It made no sense whatsoever that Apple, a computer and iPhone company, would make a car.  It seemed so crazy to me.  And then today, we see this article saying the idea is all but dead.  That makes the most sense of all.
  • Apple Vision Pro is unsurprisingly expensive to produce

    Follows what I've been saying.  People who think VISION PRO will soon drop to AliExpress prices are delusional.

    In 1984, the Macintosh made its debut for $2,495.  Later that year, the Macintosh was upgrade with a decent amount of RAM.  Cost?  $3195 initially, because RAM was expensive in those days.  The Mac 128K dropped to $2,195, but is that really an AliExpress drop? LOL.  No.  What about the Mac 512Ke?  Oh look!  A price drop! Now only $1,999.  That's sure to please the AliExpress price lovers!  Oh wait...  The 512Ke came out in 1986 when the Mac Plus also came out, selling for $2,600 -- more than the original 128K Mac.  How about the Mac SE in 1987?  Nope. $2,898, unless you wanted a 20MB hard disk, and then $3,698. (Admittedly, the Mac Plus still sold during the SE years.) Surely the 1989 compact Macs must have been cheaper, you say?  Nope.  The SE/30 came out for $4,369 for a mere 1MB of RAM and no hard disk, rising to $6,569 for 4MB of RAM and an 80MB HDD.

    I could go on, but you get the picture.

    When newer models include even better, cutting edge tech inside as compared with the original model, the price doesn't go down.  Traditionally, it has gotten more expensive.  And certainly, inflationary pressures will drive that too.  And while older models like the Mac Plus continued to be sold alongside better and more expensive models like the SE, the Plus was never AliExpress cheap.

    Even if you argue that the cost of the current cutting edge tech will go down over time, and even if you argue that increased sales volumes will drive the price down as compared to now, I simply don't see VISION PRO becoming a $500 product that competes with META.  Strip out all the expensive features that make VISION PRO unique and better, sure.  But Apple would be stupid to do that.

    So let's get our expectations adjusted in accordance with reality, folks.
  • Reports are spreading about a very specific Apple Vision Pro front glass crack

    Checked the comments and sure enough there were falsehoods.  I purchased two G4 Cubes back in the day, was an active member of Cubeowner.com and read most of the Cube related info about that machine.  It's been my avatar for over two decades.  They WERE NOT CRACKS!  They were indeed mold lines.  And any lines on my two Cubes are not that prominent.  You had a bunch of people grabbing their magnifying glasses back in the day to scrutinize every last thing because it was a pricey computer for what you got.  Then you had the silly media trashing it over price and how unpopular it was, in part because the media trashed it.  And yet, the G4 Cube to this day continues to be an incredible piece of industrial design.  It's truly fantastic.  So get over the "they were cracks" line.  G4 Cubes were not cracking at all.

    Now this news report about VISION PRO could be something very different than the G4 Cube, because like I said, those lines on the Cube are MOLD LINES, not cracks.  Furthermore, the G4 Cube's case was thick plastic, whereas the glass on the VISION PRO is extremely thin and even has a thin film on the outside which is highly prone to scratching.  The two really cannot be compared.

    Honestly, it isn't too surprising that there are reports of cracked glass.  Anything wearable needs to be made durable.  Apple couldn't make the glass any thicker because even now it is a bit heavy.  And just like when you put those thin glass protectors on your iPhone, cracks occurring during normal use happen.  The thinner the glass, the more likely it is to happen.

    This is upsetting news to be sure.  We have too many people unnecessarily trashing Apple's ground-breaking VISION PRO as it is, so news like this will no doubt make some would-be buyers reconsider.  Not sure how best Apple should address this, but addressing people's concerns is paramount if sales of the device are to lead to future models and new innovations over time, no unlike the iPhone.  But as was the case with the G4 Cube, if few people buy it, Apple could abandon it.  And that would be yet another crying shame.
  • Apple Vision Pro could take four generations to perfect

    Xed said:
    Then let's address just two of the illogical comments you made...

    1) You said, "I don't see how Apple can possibly address 'weight' in 4 generations." I then pointed out that weight is addressed within 4 generations of most (if not all) of their products. You can pretty much throw a stone in any direction to find an example of this.

    2) You then said, "Have they addressed weight with any other product since Apple's inception, such that they made a product so FEATHER LIGHT no one would ever complain about wearing it on their face?  No!  Somebody out there will ALWAYS complain about weight." I then pointed out that someone complaining doesn't mean that weight hasn't been addressed, hasn't been greatly improved, or isn't best in class. Based on your comments you seem to be one of those people that will always complain about something no matter how much it improves.
    Here's my rebuttal of your 2 points:

    1) My contention about Apple not being able to address the WEIGHT of a THING ON ONE'S FACE is MY CONTENTION.  And YOUR CONTENTION that Apple CAN address it (regardless of how fast or slow) is just that — YOUR CONTENTION.  There is nothing LOGICAL or ILLOGICAL about such a difference of opinion.  Hence your statement in (1) doesn't make sense.  All you did was try to say we disagree, which has nothing to do with the "illogical comments" accusation you fired my way.  But I suspect you feel strongly you are right based on DIFFERENT PRODUCTS from Apple's past which you are EXPECTING to apply to the VISION PRO.  Such SPECULATION is fine. You clearly hold that opinion.  And I clearly disagree.  And here we are.  But there's nothing logical or illogical about our disagreement.  I simply don't think what Apple has done with the past with VERY DIFFERENT kinds of products applies to the VISION PRO because the VISION PRO is worn on the face and is therefore TOTALLY DIFFERENT than a Mac, MacBook, iPhone, iPad, Pippin -- you name it -- which has come before.

    2) All you said here is that I am somehow (without providing rock solid evidence of any kind) "one of those people that will always complain about something no matter how much it improves."  That too makes zero sense.  I've been an AAPL shareholder since 1999 and have never sold a single share all these years.  I want Apple to succeed in all it does, but that doesn't mean speak only words which preach to the choir.  I give praise where praise is due (and the VISION PRO deserves a lot of it), and I give criticism when it is due.  So to suggest I am somehow in a very different camp of people who ALWAYS COMPLAIN makes zero sense.

    If I had something more to add which I didn't say already to defend myself, I would.  But I've said all that needs to be said on the matter.  So... Ditto my earlier two posts.  They make a lot of sense, even if you happen to disagree with MY CONTENTION in them.  

    It's okay to disagree.  A lot of people who loved the Butterfly keyboard disagreed with me.  A lot of people who love the charging jack on the bottom of the mouse shipped with every Mac disagree with me because I don't like it there.  A lot of people who thought the round design of the hockey puck mouse disagreed with me because I advocated the purchase of a third party plastic snap-on gizmo that helps you orient the mouse properly.  A lot of people who hated the SD card slot and told me they were actually GLAD it was "gone for good" disagreed with me for wanting it back.  Friend, it's okay to disagree.  History itself will show who is or was right in the end.  That's all that really matters.  I want to see some form of the VISION PRO succeed.  But that doesn't mean I am willingly oblivious of what the TECH MEDIA preaches, which unfortunately is a lot of negativity about weight.  And I merely chimed it to say that is one area that sadly won't change sufficiently to eliminate most of those complaints over time.  Deciding whether to put a 16" MBP (my choice) in a school backpack rather than a speed-limited MacBook Air is totally different than choosing to put something on your face!  Totally and utterly different.  With a heavy backpack, just be a man or work out more!  But on your face?  Does being a macho man help with that?  No.  And such is the foundation of all my prior writing on this point to date.

    THE END.
  • Apple Vision Pro could take four generations to perfect

    Xed said:
    jdw said:
    I don't see how Apple can possibly address "weight" in 4 generations.  Have they addressed weight with any other product since Apple's inception, such that they made a product so FEATHER LIGHT no one would ever complain about wearing it on their face?  No!  Somebody out there will ALWAYS complain about weight as long as a thing is worn on one's face!  And when will VISION PRO not be worn on the face?  Well, when Apple comes out with the Apple HoloDeck version, that's when!  And I assure you, that HoloDeck version won't be out in my lifetime.

    Therefore, people who complain about weight will just need to get over it because it's not going away anytime soon.  You can make it lighter than now, but never light enough to satisfy the "it weighs too much" people.
    Addressing weight and making something so no could possibly complain are two very different things. One is very likely to happen based on Apple's long history of released product and the natural state of technology, and the other is very unlikely based on the old adage that "you can't please everyone."
    The fact the sky is blue and the fact the moon is white are also "two very different things," but the fact remains you can use the two in the same conversation.  So in light of that, I don't follow your argument here.  True, you also say that that "Apple having a long history" indicates it can address weight, but all that means is Apple could shave a couple insignificant grams here and there.  Your remarks are not specific and just taking guesses that future weight reductions will "be enough."  But what you wrote doesn't specifically say this: "Apple's history proves it will shave off so much weight over time that the weight issue will no longer be an issue at all."  You perhaps eluded to that without saying it, but your statements are vague enough to generate speculation about what you really mean.

    What I wrote was clear.  I personally don't think Apple can shave off enough weight to please the TECH MEDIA who perpetually complain about it being too heavy or tiring after an hour of use.  But even when it comes to end users of VISION PRO (who are not really than plenteous right now), we must consider the ladies who may dislike a heaving thing on their face even more than men.  And we must consider people who aren't into wearables much at all.  For example, I don't wear any watch at all because I don't like things on my wrists.

    I personally DO NOT think Apple can make a person who otherwise does not want something on their face to want it even with modest weight reductions.

    I personally DO NOT think Apple can shave off enough weight to please a meaningful number of users, or people in the tech media, to start giving the tech the praise it is due.  I feel there will always be a large number of these weight-complainers who will bring more attention to their complaints about weight than the ground breaking tech Apple has brought to the market.

    I have a pair of plastic eye glasses with thin lenses and very thin frames, but I still don't like wearing them because I dislike things on my face.  (Yes, my eyes are still pretty good without the glasses, so it's not like I must wear them.)  So even if you made them lighter, would it please me?  No, it would not.

    It's all about this BEING ON YOUR FACE, my friend.  So your argument (or so I'm guessing based on what you wrote) that Apple can shave off more weight over time (due to their history, somehow) and thereby please a huge number of people (even if that isn't "everyone") makes two huge assumptions that: (1) the weight loss over time will be enough, and (2) that most would-be users won't mind having something on their face.

    I'm not really praising Apple or bashing Apple here. It's just a living reality.  The whole tech media seems obsessed with weight, but I don't see that issue vanishing anytime soon. And that is because it all centers on having something ON YOUR FACE.  Even people who mind that less than others (e.g., people who wear eyeglasses and have since a child and therefore don't notice them as much as people like me), might mind a COMPARATIVELY HEAVIER item on their face.  But practically speaking, can Apple, even 20 years hence, make a VISION PRO that weighs as little as thin plastic eyeglasses which have thin plastic frames?  The PHYSICS answer "no" to that question.  As a result, I wish to repeat the closing remarks I made in my previous post...

    Therefore, people who complain about weight will just need to get over it because it's not going away anytime soon.  You can make it lighter than now, but never light enough to satisfy the "it weighs too much" people.