10 ms·

The first iPhone was pretty crappy. No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. Limited global distribution - not even Canada could get it. But it captivated people w

by ttul 3y ago

The first iPhone was pretty crappy. No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. Limited global distribution - not even Canada could get it. But it captivated people who didn’t own it yet, and it proved out some essential ideas like multitouch. And when the iPhone 3G came out, improving on some of the original device’s shortcomings, it was wildly popular. The rest is history. There is no doubt that AR will eventually get good enough that the devices are paper thin, weigh nothing, and have no external battery (of course). Everyone wants _that_ device, but you have to start somewhere. Apple can afford to be patient in this space and their considerable moat of intellectual property will allow them to carve out the high end of the AR market and then work down as they did with iPhone. It would not surprise me if they are earning 90% of the gross margins in the AR device space within three years.

omeze 3y ago
The first iphone let you have a real web browser anywhere you had cell coverage. This lets you have a web browser floating at home. Its not the same (and I love VR)
- mcphage 3y ago
  And Visual Voice Mail—that was a huge step forward.
  - philistine 3y ago
    Believe it or not, my carrier finally got visual voicemail in 2022.
    - LadyCailin 3y ago
      Just in time for regular phone calls to be on their way out.
- macNchz 3y ago
  I didn’t get one until the 3G came out, but I have a very clear memory of the “wow!” feeling: right after buying the phone, I went down the street to a coffee shop and started browsing the web while waiting in line. I was instantly cured of my prior skepticism that it could actually be a major improvement over my flip phone + iPod.
  - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
    Also GPS maps with that shiny glass dot. You bought a phone, and you got a GPS navigator for free. I had a friend who had just bought a high end Nokia. We arranged to meet for lunch. She got hopelessly lost because Nokia's GPS and mapping were crap. Apple's just worked. Same with the App Store. I'd guess this is going to have some kind of VApp Store. But I suspect what it really needs is plain old MacOS running everything as usual, with slightly customised support for virtual displays.
    - mobilio 3y ago
      Original Maps in iPhone was actually Google Maps. This make astonishing growth in Google Maps.
      - h5iou234o234 3y ago
        Of course, with Google, nothing is "free" free. Google tracks your location so that they can track ad conversions based on store-visits (no I'm not kidding).
    - tpmoney 3y ago
      It’s worth remembering the original iPhone did not have GPS at all. It had google maps for calling up information like you would with map quest, but no turn by turn/live navigation
      - dosethree 3y ago
        It had basic geolocation feature though so you could mostly see where you were on a map which was still very useful compared to flip phones
- manuelabeledo 3y ago
  There were also hundreds of phones doing that already. And phones with touchscreens. I guess we’ll need to wait to see what happens with this. Apple has a good track with proving tech literate people wrong.
saiya-jin 3y ago
First iphone had this WOW effect, before there were clunky crappy Microsoft-OS powered boxes with pens and crappy slow imprecise displays. I recall, I had one, it was a massive shift and basically a new type of device. This... judging by extremely careful wording of a web which needs to play very very nice with vendors to get these early access peeks, seems to not have it. More like nicely polished hammer looking for nails everywhere. Yes, many aspects fine tuned above competition, but competition is not asleep and the gap is not that big. In some aspects, it will be objectively worse (constant powerbank cable which lasts barely 2 hours, realistically a bit above 1 hour breaks immersion very effectively compared to ie Quest, plus you want to have 4 powerbanks and furiously swapping over one longer evening? Not even going into sharing ultra expensive device with rest of household). Phones are absolute must in modern world, they were already 90% there when first iphone arrived. VR/AR goggles are still considered idiotic by majority of population, maybe Apple can change that but it will take few years at least.
bombcar 3y ago
The first iPhone was an iPod that could make phone calls; that was all it needed to be (for the people who were already carrying a phone and an iPod).
- ztrww 3y ago
  A large multitouch display was a pretty big deal. I watched movies on my iPod classic but it wasn’t a very nice experience and the scroll wheel is not exactly the most flexible input method..
TexanFeller 3y ago
> The first iPhone was pretty crappy It had some must have killer features for the time. Blackberry and feature phones had some pathetic "mobile web" while the original iPhone would load real websites.
xtiansimon 3y ago
I recall not long after the iPod was released in the early 00’s that peeps were clamoring for an Apple phone. It took seven years before Apple fans got their wish. IPhone landed in the world of Nokia, Blackberry, Motorola. All juggernauts in the mobile phone industry. Just not the same scenario and game plan. Brilliant design is one thing, but Apple has landed at the intersection of Hardware & Software in a developed field. Right? Steve Jobs pulled back from running OS on clone hardware, because Apple’s winning scenario was to do both to make great designed products. At 3k+ this is classic early adopter scenario. Maybe there are enough people with stupid money who will work out issues for the later ~1k version…provided another company doesn’t sweep in and eat Apple’s lunch
ohgodplsno 3y ago
The first iPhone was the first phone with a proper touch screen. The Vision is about the 50th VR device, in a market that's already quite busy with the Vives, Indexes and Quests. It brings nothing new, and is just one more high resolution VR device (which existed before for cheaper).
CyberDildonics 3y ago
The first iphone was the first time most people could actually use the internet on something they could carry around, even if it was just with wifi. It did everything phones did but much better since it was all touch. Interfaces to alarms, the calculator, the camera etc was entirely different. Anyone who used it knew that everyone else would either copy it or go out of business.
- ztrww 3y ago
  Windows Mobile and Symbian devices were a thing for years and had functioning browsers. The iPhone was an improvement (as long as you had wifi) but it took a couple of years before it actually become widespread
  - CyberDildonics 3y ago
    They weren't anywhere close to being the same. You had no multi-touch, no pinch zoom and no fluid panning and scrolling.
    - ztrww 3y ago
      Exactly, you’d use the to do the same thing more or less but the iPhone had way better UX. The idea of browsing the web on your phone wasn’t something new or revolutionary, it was all about the implementation.
      - CyberDildonics 3y ago
        No, it wasn't the same. Before people would only be able to use special mobile pages and scroll through a few options at a time. Looking at a general site like reddit was basically impossible. Reading a news article on a normal site was basically impossible. It was a total game changer and most people went from never using the mobile internet to using it frequently.
        dingaling 3y ago
philistine 3y ago
To add to the appeal of iPhone's original release; do not forget the iPod Touch. Released in late 2007, it was available far more broadly and was a great entry point into the world of those crazy new iPhones. It was my first iOS device and I even paid the 14.99$ for the update to get mail, calendar and contacts. I played way more games back then than I do now since I was often without a Wi-Fi network.
nathanasmith 3y ago
The first iPhone was fantastic. The instant people saw it they wanted it and when they laid hands on it they needed it. The Apple Vision on the other hand is.. a screen strapped to your face.
fennecfoxy 3y ago
Lmao, but the first iPhone was a major improvement over other phones at the time and offered a form of consistence/stability versus the often very experimental models other companies had. The difference here is of course that VR/AR has been thriving already. Apple is late to the game as they are most of the time, but the reactions I have seen so far in YT/Twit comments are the amazed reactions of the tech illiterate general public, they don't care what it does, but it does have an Apple logo! Apple is not bringing anything new to the table. No virtual objects, no 3d anything, just 2d planes showing video/photos which non-Apple VR/AR has had for the longest time. This is just from the briefest search: https://www.vrdesktop.net/ https://www.vrdesktop.net/. Already exists and looks more fully featured than Apple's stuff. Apple is a 1T company, the "richest and most technologically advanced company in the world", so why don't they act like it? They do seem to have an impressive resolution on the thing, but only Apple can ask for 3.5k, no other headset bothers to have as high a resolution atm because they know consumers will balk at such a high price... Apple's press release shows it as if some rando people are using the thing at home as if it's not going to be art studios, etc that buy the headset and a couple of hardcore Apple fans. No regular person is buying a 3.5k VR/AR set to look at a crappy 2d photo gallery app. Other VR/AR software for existing headsets like the Vive/Oculus etc already do actual virtual objects/interaction as baseline and Apple couldn't even be bothered to include something like that for their press release. Because they don't need to, I suppose. People will eat it up anyway.
- ztrww 3y ago
  > No virtual objects, no 3d anything Presumably this will be a thing since they support on the iPhone and tries making a pretty big deal from by showing virtual legos and other stuff in a keynote a year or two ago. The ARKit seems to have been designed for this thing since it wasn’t ever a very good experience on the iPhone. https://developer.apple.com/augmented-reality/ https://developer.apple.com/augmented-reality/
- notaustinpowers 3y ago
  This device looks to be a monumental improvement over any current consumer AR/VR headset. From the user reviews that've come out so far, they've talked about the very forgiving hand-tracking, the high-fidelity screens, the nearly imperceptible delay from the cameras, how comfortable it is to wear, etc. For your point about the no virtual objects, what would you want Apple to do? Create an entirely new OS requiring developers to build everything in a purely 3D environment? It'd be DOA if they did that. They have to highlight how EASY it is to port their current apps to VisionOS. Hell, they released Rosetta years before the M1 came out and there's STILL some apps that don't support M1 Macs. They have to make it easy, and allow the developers to decide to flex their muscle on this thing. iOS apps in the first year or two of the app store looked god awful because no one really knew what to DO with the thing, but now we do. I think VR like this is going to be the same way. From what they showcased and the initial reviews out right now, this does look to be the most technologically advanced mixed reality headset. But obviously the most technology advanced headset is going to be eyewateringly expensive. Apple back in the day was always, the customer doesn't know what they want, you have to show it to them. This is going to light a fire under every other headset makers ass that they can't push out headsets with shit camera delays, poor screens, and shody controls anymore and expect to make money. And you're right, people will eat it up because it's Apple and only they can get away with it. I'm not buying it, I have to afford groceries somehow. But the rich finance bros buying it to show off their wealth bankrolling Apple's R&D for the next few years to make a more consumer-friendly one? Yeah, knock yourself out. I'll buy refurbished one in 2026.
perardi 3y ago
As people below have pointed out, arguable it was crappy. Sure, lacked 3G, lacked apps, but the utter ease of connecting to wifi and flicking through Safari… …anyways, arguable. What’s inarguable is that the iPhone 4, which came along only 3 years later, was a damned miracle. Beautiful design, Retina screen, something approaching a “real” camera—just remarkable progress in that time. I’m unsure if Apple is going to be able to pull off that hyperspeed progression this time. The Vision Pro seems to have truly wild capabilities, but for a lot of money and with very little battery life. Are we going to have a big leap in price/performance soon? I dunno.
- ztrww 3y ago
  The iPhone 4 came out a year after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_HD2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_HD2 and kind of felt meh with it’s tiny screen. I didn’t really get what the fuss was about until the iPhone 6 (aside from software and arguably Android had caught up by then)
- felixg3 3y ago
  The lack of 3G was barely an issue back then, I used my iPhone on the go with text messengers and web browsing without too many issues. Edge/2G+ wasn’t too horrible, since the web was so much lighter back then (especially since flash didn’t load).
GeekyBear 3y ago
> No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. This particular song has gotten pretty familiar. No Wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.
noelrock 3y ago
Spurious enough comparison given there were phones, a developed phone market which was 150m+ globally even at that stage, and demonstrated clear use cases for an iphone (an ipod, a phone and an internet browser combined). Yep it iterated and yep app store really rocket charged it beyond where it was envisaged on day one. But it was also an existing market, albeit one that was at the foothills of its potential. AR/VR too is at the foothills of its potential. But the fundamental problem is: even when its potential is realised, it'll still just be relatively niche and relatively fringe. This stuff simply is not going to be mainstream in a serious way. And without being mainstream, there is no real revenue stream of utility for a company of Apple's size. I have no idea why people are doing such backflips to come up with potential use cases but most of them just aren't runners. This will sell to an extent for Apple but it'll be a rounding error on their balance sheet at best - even in future versions - though I imagine a lot of the tech will end up elsewhere, so it won't be a complete lost cause for Apple.
- webjprgm 3y ago
  The potential is to replace computers. In its current version, it is basically an iPad on your face. Look a little forward and it is a laptop on your face. Imagine that the price came down to $1500-2000 in a couple years, now you can buy an Apple Vision instead of a laptop. And you wouldn't need to buy a TV either. So this does have device consolidation potential like the iPhone did and it can tap into an existing market like the iPhone tapped into the phone markets. I think previous AR/VR devices didn't quite have the right sweetspot of hardware features (too low resolution, tied to one spot, extra controllers), but this one looks like it might just do it. What it doesn't have is a low enough cost, so it will be a slow start. I'm also still curious if there will be a "killer app" that encourages people to get into it, but the long-term vision of spatial computing is itself enough of a killer feature. I just wonder how long that will take.
  - LadyCailin 3y ago
    I think this replacing TVs is a really hard sell, except in remarkably niche people. Sitting on the couch together playing Nintendo just can’t be replaced, and apple surely doesn’t want to allow third party inputs, they want an internal app ecosystem, which Nintendo and PlayStation won’t ever do. (Xbox maybe). Laptop replacement, I can buy though. But only some fraction of those, nothing large, and certainly no larger than iPhone market share percentages.
mattfrommars 3y ago
> The first iPhone was pretty crappy. Holy sht. Can people really* stop comparing launch of VR and with Iphone? I have been reading tons of comments here and only to see the OP, and folks with similar post here to be proven wrong. Again after again, proven wrong! The fundamentals question is where is the killer app! Like original poster, this shouldn't be hard for a three trillion dollar company! Only if there was a way to filter out post that go along the lines of "....The first iPhone was pretty crappy.... "
rchaud 3y ago
Apple cut the price of IPhone 2G by 33%, and got AT&T to subsidize handsets for $200. It was dead in the water before then. Even if Apple made a similar price cut here, the device would still cost over $2000.
- gamblor956 3y ago
  Yeah, people forget that the iPhone was actually considered a flop when it first launched; it was too expensive so despite the interest in the product relatively few people were actually willing to pay for it. The true genius was getting AT&T to subsidize the handsets and pay for the marketing, which gave Apple a lifeline worth billions and essentially created the market.
matt-attack 3y ago
Exactly this. It's taken 14 iterations to get the iPhone to where it is. Apple Watch has taken 8 or so. Apple has taking a long time iterating to get to where we are today on this platforms. Baby steps really. Each version introduced things we totally take for granted today. I remember just getting the Retina screen on the iPhone 4 was a massively big deal. Just think what Vision will be after 10 iterations and a decade of time.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

by ttul 3y ago

omeze 3y ago

The first iphone let you have a real web browser anywhere you had cell coverage. This lets you have a web browser floating at home. Its not the same (and I love VR)

mcphage 3y ago
And Visual Voice Mail—that was a huge step forward.
- philistine 3y ago
  Believe it or not, my carrier finally got visual voicemail in 2022.
  - LadyCailin 3y ago
    Just in time for regular phone calls to be on their way out.
macNchz 3y ago
I didn’t get one until the 3G came out, but I have a very clear memory of the “wow!” feeling: right after buying the phone, I went down the street to a coffee shop and started browsing the web while waiting in line. I was instantly cured of my prior skepticism that it could actually be a major improvement over my flip phone + iPod.
- TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
  Also GPS maps with that shiny glass dot. You bought a phone, and you got a GPS navigator for free. I had a friend who had just bought a high end Nokia. We arranged to meet for lunch. She got hopelessly lost because Nokia's GPS and mapping were crap. Apple's just worked. Same with the App Store. I'd guess this is going to have some kind of VApp Store. But I suspect what it really needs is plain old MacOS running everything as usual, with slightly customised support for virtual displays.
  - mobilio 3y ago
    Original Maps in iPhone was actually Google Maps. This make astonishing growth in Google Maps.
    - h5iou234o234 3y ago
      Of course, with Google, nothing is "free" free. Google tracks your location so that they can track ad conversions based on store-visits (no I'm not kidding).
  - tpmoney 3y ago
    It’s worth remembering the original iPhone did not have GPS at all. It had google maps for calling up information like you would with map quest, but no turn by turn/live navigation
    - dosethree 3y ago
      It had basic geolocation feature though so you could mostly see where you were on a map which was still very useful compared to flip phones
manuelabeledo 3y ago
There were also hundreds of phones doing that already. And phones with touchscreens. I guess we’ll need to wait to see what happens with this. Apple has a good track with proving tech literate people wrong.

saiya-jin 3y ago

First iphone had this WOW effect, before there were clunky crappy Microsoft-OS powered boxes with pens and crappy slow imprecise displays. I recall, I had one, it was a massive shift and basically a new type of device. This... judging by extremely careful wording of a web which needs to play very very nice with vendors to get these early access peeks, seems to not have it. More like nicely polished hammer looking for nails everywhere. Yes, many aspects fine tuned above competition, but competition is not asleep and the gap is not that big. In some aspects, it will be objectively worse (constant powerbank cable which lasts barely 2 hours, realistically a bit above 1 hour breaks immersion very effectively compared to ie Quest, plus you want to have 4 powerbanks and furiously swapping over one longer evening? Not even going into sharing ultra expensive device with rest of household). Phones are absolute must in modern world, they were already 90% there when first iphone arrived. VR/AR goggles are still considered idiotic by majority of population, maybe Apple can change that but it will take few years at least.

bombcar 3y ago

The first iPhone was an iPod that could make phone calls; that was all it needed to be (for the people who were already carrying a phone and an iPod).

ztrww 3y ago
A large multitouch display was a pretty big deal. I watched movies on my iPod classic but it wasn’t a very nice experience and the scroll wheel is not exactly the most flexible input method..

TexanFeller 3y ago

> The first iPhone was pretty crappy It had some must have killer features for the time. Blackberry and feature phones had some pathetic "mobile web" while the original iPhone would load real websites.

xtiansimon 3y ago

I recall not long after the iPod was released in the early 00’s that peeps were clamoring for an Apple phone. It took seven years before Apple fans got their wish. IPhone landed in the world of Nokia, Blackberry, Motorola. All juggernauts in the mobile phone industry. Just not the same scenario and game plan. Brilliant design is one thing, but Apple has landed at the intersection of Hardware & Software in a developed field. Right? Steve Jobs pulled back from running OS on clone hardware, because Apple’s winning scenario was to do both to make great designed products. At 3k+ this is classic early adopter scenario. Maybe there are enough people with stupid money who will work out issues for the later ~1k version…provided another company doesn’t sweep in and eat Apple’s lunch

ohgodplsno 3y ago

The first iPhone was the first phone with a proper touch screen. The Vision is about the 50th VR device, in a market that's already quite busy with the Vives, Indexes and Quests. It brings nothing new, and is just one more high resolution VR device (which existed before for cheaper).

CyberDildonics 3y ago

The first iphone was the first time most people could actually use the internet on something they could carry around, even if it was just with wifi. It did everything phones did but much better since it was all touch. Interfaces to alarms, the calculator, the camera etc was entirely different. Anyone who used it knew that everyone else would either copy it or go out of business.

ztrww 3y ago
Windows Mobile and Symbian devices were a thing for years and had functioning browsers. The iPhone was an improvement (as long as you had wifi) but it took a couple of years before it actually become widespread
- CyberDildonics 3y ago
  They weren't anywhere close to being the same. You had no multi-touch, no pinch zoom and no fluid panning and scrolling.
  - ztrww 3y ago
    Exactly, you’d use the to do the same thing more or less but the iPhone had way better UX. The idea of browsing the web on your phone wasn’t something new or revolutionary, it was all about the implementation.
    - CyberDildonics 3y ago
      No, it wasn't the same. Before people would only be able to use special mobile pages and scroll through a few options at a time. Looking at a general site like reddit was basically impossible. Reading a news article on a normal site was basically impossible. It was a total game changer and most people went from never using the mobile internet to using it frequently.
      - dingaling 3y ago

philistine 3y ago

To add to the appeal of iPhone's original release; do not forget the iPod Touch. Released in late 2007, it was available far more broadly and was a great entry point into the world of those crazy new iPhones. It was my first iOS device and I even paid the 14.99$ for the update to get mail, calendar and contacts. I played way more games back then than I do now since I was often without a Wi-Fi network.

nathanasmith 3y ago

The first iPhone was fantastic. The instant people saw it they wanted it and when they laid hands on it they needed it. The Apple Vision on the other hand is.. a screen strapped to your face.

fennecfoxy 3y ago

Lmao, but the first iPhone was a major improvement over other phones at the time and offered a form of consistence/stability versus the often very experimental models other companies had. The difference here is of course that VR/AR has been thriving already. Apple is late to the game as they are most of the time, but the reactions I have seen so far in YT/Twit comments are the amazed reactions of the tech illiterate general public, they don't care what it does, but it does have an Apple logo! Apple is not bringing anything new to the table. No virtual objects, no 3d anything, just 2d planes showing video/photos which non-Apple VR/AR has had for the longest time. This is just from the briefest search: https://www.vrdesktop.net/ https://www.vrdesktop.net/. Already exists and looks more fully featured than Apple's stuff. Apple is a 1T company, the "richest and most technologically advanced company in the world", so why don't they act like it? They do seem to have an impressive resolution on the thing, but only Apple can ask for 3.5k, no other headset bothers to have as high a resolution atm because they know consumers will balk at such a high price... Apple's press release shows it as if some rando people are using the thing at home as if it's not going to be art studios, etc that buy the headset and a couple of hardcore Apple fans. No regular person is buying a 3.5k VR/AR set to look at a crappy 2d photo gallery app. Other VR/AR software for existing headsets like the Vive/Oculus etc already do actual virtual objects/interaction as baseline and Apple couldn't even be bothered to include something like that for their press release. Because they don't need to, I suppose. People will eat it up anyway.

ztrww 3y ago
> No virtual objects, no 3d anything Presumably this will be a thing since they support on the iPhone and tries making a pretty big deal from by showing virtual legos and other stuff in a keynote a year or two ago. The ARKit seems to have been designed for this thing since it wasn’t ever a very good experience on the iPhone. https://developer.apple.com/augmented-reality/ https://developer.apple.com/augmented-reality/
notaustinpowers 3y ago
This device looks to be a monumental improvement over any current consumer AR/VR headset. From the user reviews that've come out so far, they've talked about the very forgiving hand-tracking, the high-fidelity screens, the nearly imperceptible delay from the cameras, how comfortable it is to wear, etc. For your point about the no virtual objects, what would you want Apple to do? Create an entirely new OS requiring developers to build everything in a purely 3D environment? It'd be DOA if they did that. They have to highlight how EASY it is to port their current apps to VisionOS. Hell, they released Rosetta years before the M1 came out and there's STILL some apps that don't support M1 Macs. They have to make it easy, and allow the developers to decide to flex their muscle on this thing. iOS apps in the first year or two of the app store looked god awful because no one really knew what to DO with the thing, but now we do. I think VR like this is going to be the same way. From what they showcased and the initial reviews out right now, this does look to be the most technologically advanced mixed reality headset. But obviously the most technology advanced headset is going to be eyewateringly expensive. Apple back in the day was always, the customer doesn't know what they want, you have to show it to them. This is going to light a fire under every other headset makers ass that they can't push out headsets with shit camera delays, poor screens, and shody controls anymore and expect to make money. And you're right, people will eat it up because it's Apple and only they can get away with it. I'm not buying it, I have to afford groceries somehow. But the rich finance bros buying it to show off their wealth bankrolling Apple's R&D for the next few years to make a more consumer-friendly one? Yeah, knock yourself out. I'll buy refurbished one in 2026.

perardi 3y ago

As people below have pointed out, arguable it was crappy. Sure, lacked 3G, lacked apps, but the utter ease of connecting to wifi and flicking through Safari… …anyways, arguable. What’s inarguable is that the iPhone 4, which came along only 3 years later, was a damned miracle. Beautiful design, Retina screen, something approaching a “real” camera—just remarkable progress in that time. I’m unsure if Apple is going to be able to pull off that hyperspeed progression this time. The Vision Pro seems to have truly wild capabilities, but for a lot of money and with very little battery life. Are we going to have a big leap in price/performance soon? I dunno.

ztrww 3y ago
The iPhone 4 came out a year after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_HD2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_HD2 and kind of felt meh with it’s tiny screen. I didn’t really get what the fuss was about until the iPhone 6 (aside from software and arguably Android had caught up by then)
felixg3 3y ago
The lack of 3G was barely an issue back then, I used my iPhone on the go with text messengers and web browsing without too many issues. Edge/2G+ wasn’t too horrible, since the web was so much lighter back then (especially since flash didn’t load).

GeekyBear 3y ago

> No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. This particular song has gotten pretty familiar. No Wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

noelrock 3y ago

Spurious enough comparison given there were phones, a developed phone market which was 150m+ globally even at that stage, and demonstrated clear use cases for an iphone (an ipod, a phone and an internet browser combined). Yep it iterated and yep app store really rocket charged it beyond where it was envisaged on day one. But it was also an existing market, albeit one that was at the foothills of its potential. AR/VR too is at the foothills of its potential. But the fundamental problem is: even when its potential is realised, it'll still just be relatively niche and relatively fringe. This stuff simply is not going to be mainstream in a serious way. And without being mainstream, there is no real revenue stream of utility for a company of Apple's size. I have no idea why people are doing such backflips to come up with potential use cases but most of them just aren't runners. This will sell to an extent for Apple but it'll be a rounding error on their balance sheet at best - even in future versions - though I imagine a lot of the tech will end up elsewhere, so it won't be a complete lost cause for Apple.

webjprgm 3y ago
The potential is to replace computers. In its current version, it is basically an iPad on your face. Look a little forward and it is a laptop on your face. Imagine that the price came down to $1500-2000 in a couple years, now you can buy an Apple Vision instead of a laptop. And you wouldn't need to buy a TV either. So this does have device consolidation potential like the iPhone did and it can tap into an existing market like the iPhone tapped into the phone markets. I think previous AR/VR devices didn't quite have the right sweetspot of hardware features (too low resolution, tied to one spot, extra controllers), but this one looks like it might just do it. What it doesn't have is a low enough cost, so it will be a slow start. I'm also still curious if there will be a "killer app" that encourages people to get into it, but the long-term vision of spatial computing is itself enough of a killer feature. I just wonder how long that will take.
- LadyCailin 3y ago
  I think this replacing TVs is a really hard sell, except in remarkably niche people. Sitting on the couch together playing Nintendo just can’t be replaced, and apple surely doesn’t want to allow third party inputs, they want an internal app ecosystem, which Nintendo and PlayStation won’t ever do. (Xbox maybe). Laptop replacement, I can buy though. But only some fraction of those, nothing large, and certainly no larger than iPhone market share percentages.

mattfrommars 3y ago

> The first iPhone was pretty crappy. Holy sht. Can people really* stop comparing launch of VR and with Iphone? I have been reading tons of comments here and only to see the OP, and folks with similar post here to be proven wrong. Again after again, proven wrong! The fundamentals question is where is the killer app! Like original poster, this shouldn't be hard for a three trillion dollar company! Only if there was a way to filter out post that go along the lines of "....The first iPhone was pretty crappy.... "

rchaud 3y ago

Apple cut the price of IPhone 2G by 33%, and got AT&T to subsidize handsets for $200. It was dead in the water before then. Even if Apple made a similar price cut here, the device would still cost over $2000.

gamblor956 3y ago
Yeah, people forget that the iPhone was actually considered a flop when it first launched; it was too expensive so despite the interest in the product relatively few people were actually willing to pay for it. The true genius was getting AT&T to subsidize the handsets and pay for the marketing, which gave Apple a lifeline worth billions and essentially created the market.

matt-attack 3y ago

Exactly this. It's taken 14 iterations to get the iPhone to where it is. Apple Watch has taken 8 or so. Apple has taking a long time iterating to get to where we are today on this platforms. Baby steps really. Each version introduced things we totally take for granted today. I remember just getting the Retina screen on the iPhone 4 was a massively big deal. Just think what Vision will be after 10 iterations and a decade of time.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]