3 ms·

I think Apple was out of touch releasing such an expensive product with such niche use cases in the current times. If they wanted us to become early adopters an

I think Apple was out of touch releasing such an expensive product with such niche use cases in the current times. If they wanted us to become early adopters and proof-of-concept testers, they should've subsidized the cost, to grow the market while working on improving the device.

sneak 2y ago
It’s a dev kit.
- jbverschoor 2y ago
  The AppleTV dev kit was $1 :-)
- sp332 2y ago
  Then why be surprised that demand dried up?
- monocasa 2y ago
  Apple has released dev kits before. Most recently the apple silicon devkits. Those have pretty much universally been explicit and have come with a requirement to return the devkits once consumer hardware capable of being development hardware is released. They were hoping for consumer (or industry) acceptance. They visibly did not get that.
  - sneak 2y ago
    It doesn’t even support IMAP email credential payloads in provisioning profiles. This is some of the bare minimum required for enterprise use. I haven’t tried to MDM one yet. I don’t even know how you’d supervise one without a port to connect it to AC2. It’s quite clearly not designed for mainstream use without enterprise features or a consumer price point. Remember also that hardware pipelines are 2-3 years long. They almost certainly are well into the design of the consumer model that will come out in 18-24 months. By that time, there will be many apps available for them because of the AVP1 being in the hands of tens of thousands of developers for 12+ months.
    - monocasa 2y ago
      Except all of their previous developer kits have been about the same cost as the consumer version. Intel DTK - $999 Apple Silicon DTK - $500 iPhone - No DTK, just released without third party native apps at all. That combined with how Apple regularly whiffs enterprise support and the fact that it sits right in the middle of their current display prices looks very much like they intended it to be a true consumer/industry release.
- matsemann 2y ago
  Then ship it opened up, but perhaps more unpolished, to devs. Right now I think it's lack of success is that it's inbetween both. It's useless as a dev kit, too polished and locked down. Useless as a consumer unit when no one makes things for it. While Oculus didn't take off, the DK1 had a massive hype and a large community building stuff.
- sschueller 2y ago
  Google used to give hardware away for free at Google io. If you want me to write software for you device I ain't paying for it.
  - sneak 2y ago
    Well, with a working simulator and hundreds of thousands of them in the wild, I imagine it is possible to develop for one and test on one without actually buying one of your own.
xyst 2y ago
> subsidized the cost This isn’t Amazon. There is no 10 or 20 year vision. These Fortune 500 companies only have visions that last a couple of years, and in some cases a few quarters.
- cdscvdss 2y ago
  [flagged]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tim333 2y ago
They probably will work on improving the device and the next version will be cheaper as tech improves. I'm not sure it's a bad strategy.

sneak 2y ago

It’s a dev kit.

jbverschoor 2y ago
The AppleTV dev kit was $1 :-)
sp332 2y ago
Then why be surprised that demand dried up?
monocasa 2y ago
Apple has released dev kits before. Most recently the apple silicon devkits. Those have pretty much universally been explicit and have come with a requirement to return the devkits once consumer hardware capable of being development hardware is released. They were hoping for consumer (or industry) acceptance. They visibly did not get that.
- sneak 2y ago
  It doesn’t even support IMAP email credential payloads in provisioning profiles. This is some of the bare minimum required for enterprise use. I haven’t tried to MDM one yet. I don’t even know how you’d supervise one without a port to connect it to AC2. It’s quite clearly not designed for mainstream use without enterprise features or a consumer price point. Remember also that hardware pipelines are 2-3 years long. They almost certainly are well into the design of the consumer model that will come out in 18-24 months. By that time, there will be many apps available for them because of the AVP1 being in the hands of tens of thousands of developers for 12+ months.
  - monocasa 2y ago
    Except all of their previous developer kits have been about the same cost as the consumer version. Intel DTK - $999 Apple Silicon DTK - $500 iPhone - No DTK, just released without third party native apps at all. That combined with how Apple regularly whiffs enterprise support and the fact that it sits right in the middle of their current display prices looks very much like they intended it to be a true consumer/industry release.
matsemann 2y ago
Then ship it opened up, but perhaps more unpolished, to devs. Right now I think it's lack of success is that it's inbetween both. It's useless as a dev kit, too polished and locked down. Useless as a consumer unit when no one makes things for it. While Oculus didn't take off, the DK1 had a massive hype and a large community building stuff.
sschueller 2y ago
Google used to give hardware away for free at Google io. If you want me to write software for you device I ain't paying for it.
- sneak 2y ago
  Well, with a working simulator and hundreds of thousands of them in the wild, I imagine it is possible to develop for one and test on one without actually buying one of your own.

xyst 2y ago

> subsidized the cost This isn’t Amazon. There is no 10 or 20 year vision. These Fortune 500 companies only have visions that last a couple of years, and in some cases a few quarters.

cdscvdss 2y ago
[flagged]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

tim333 2y ago

They probably will work on improving the device and the next version will be cheaper as tech improves. I'm not sure it's a bad strategy.