32 ms·

You should still get familiar with it in the event that the next one will be cheaper as that will increase the customer base a lot.

closewith 2y ago
On track to having sold less than 15% of their Y1 target (400,000 vs 3 MM), production deliveries slashed, and the reported shareholder near-revolts, I think it's clear that the Vision Pro has flopped and there won't be a sequel any time soon.
- lapcat 2y ago
  > On track to having sold less than 15% of their Y1 target (400,000 vs 3 MM) This is a fictitious number. Apple never had the manufacturing capacity to reach that so-called target. > the reported shareholder near-revolts Citation needed.
  - andsoitis 2y ago
    GP is exaggerating (response below); at the same time many would argue that their overall argument that the Vision Pro is most probably a flop is in the ballpark. There's been much to say about price, the utility of VR, and most recently, the news that companies simply aren't bringing their apps to Vision Pro[1]. > On track to having sold less than 15% of their Y1 target (400,000 vs 3 MM) All the reports online reflect actual vs. expected more around 450-500k vs. 800k - 1M, not 3 million. > the reported shareholder near-revolts The stock market's reaction to the Vision Pro announcement saw Apple's shares dip by 3%, indicating a mix of investor optimism and concern, not revolt. [1] https://www.wsj.com/tech/personal-tech/apple-vision-pro-software-sales-fec324c0 https://www.wsj.com/tech/personal-tech/apple-vision-pro-soft...
    - dagmx 2y ago
      I think both you and the person you’re responding to are correct. The supply chain reports said <1M displays producible. That’s <500K devices producible. Regarding stock, Apple almost always dips by a significant amount during an event. They’re very much traded as buying on the hype and selling on the news.
- CameronBanga 2y ago
  All supply chain reports before the release were in line with the fact that the in-headset screens were capped at 1million maximum production possible for the first year, and two screens are required for each headset. 3MM was never possible, not sure where you got these numbers.
troupo 2y ago
So, a developer should spend ~$5000 with no chance of ROI on the off chance that at some undefined point in the future this will pay off when they would have to spend another ~$5000 developing for the newer/cheaper/whatever device?
jsheard 2y ago
The rumor mill is saying it will be cheaper... but still not cheap at ~$2000. https://www.uploadvr.com/non-pro-apple-vision-headset-reportedly-2000/ https://www.uploadvr.com/non-pro-apple-vision-headset-report... Meta is having enough trouble attracting developers with hardware that's an order of magnitude cheaper and has two orders of magnitude more units in the wild. They got through the first hurdle of convincing people to try VR but keep falling at the second hurdle of user retention, headsets that are gathering dust in a closet don't make any money for developers. Apples decision to go all-in on hand tracking compounds the software problem even further because the vast majority of VR software that has already been developed is designed around controllers with IMUs/buttons/sticks/triggers/haptics, and would be very difficult to port over to the Vision Pros much more limited control scheme.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  Apple does have the advantage of being able to project their 2D apps if they want, right? A $5k device seems like a dead end, and a $2k one seems pretty rough still (unless it totally replaces your laptop, which might make it worth considering). They clearly haven’t executed it correctly yet. But at least they do have some hope of beating the bootstrapping problem that everybody else seems to have—they could try and get users first, and then I bet developers would quickly follow.
  - marxisttemp 2y ago
    > Apple does have the advantage of being able to project their 2D apps if they want, right? Developers have to manually check a box to enable running the iPad version of their app on visionOS so it’s entirely out of Apple’s hands. Not sure why they took this approach
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      Likely some sort of legal or PR reason.
    - dagmx 2y ago
      It’s the opposite of your claim. It’s opt out, not opt in. > Your iPhone and iPad apps will be made available to users on Apple Vision Pro, unless you edit your apps’ availability in the App Store Connect https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-your-apps-availability/manage-availability-of-iphone-and-ipad-apps-on-apple-vision-pro/ https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-yo... And it makes sense for some devs to not provide their app on the platform if they use unsupported APIs or if their experience is otherwise degraded for some unknowable reason. Though the side effect is Netflix and YouTube can just withhold their apps that presumably otherwise work.
jncfhnb 2y ago
Could hit double digits next time
moolcool 2y ago
You're still making a big assumption that this is a device anybody actually wants in the first place. How many of the people who bought one of these actually still use them with any regularity?
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
Familiarity is fine, but don't bet your livelihood on it just yet; have enough knowledge to be able to pivot to it if it does take off. But I'm not seeing it.
jayd16 2y ago
I doubt it... The platform seems like a dud without some big changes. If big changes are coming, how much time to market do you really save working on this iteration?
layer8 2y ago
The platform has no killer mainstream use-case besides watching movies on a big virtual screen in solitude, with the drawback of having a heavy headset strapped to your face. I doubt that it would fare very well even sub-$1000. If they invested in gaming and allowed 3D controllers, the story might be different.

closewith 2y ago

On track to having sold less than 15% of their Y1 target (400,000 vs 3 MM), production deliveries slashed, and the reported shareholder near-revolts, I think it's clear that the Vision Pro has flopped and there won't be a sequel any time soon.

lapcat 2y ago
> On track to having sold less than 15% of their Y1 target (400,000 vs 3 MM) This is a fictitious number. Apple never had the manufacturing capacity to reach that so-called target. > the reported shareholder near-revolts Citation needed.
- andsoitis 2y ago
  GP is exaggerating (response below); at the same time many would argue that their overall argument that the Vision Pro is most probably a flop is in the ballpark. There's been much to say about price, the utility of VR, and most recently, the news that companies simply aren't bringing their apps to Vision Pro[1]. > On track to having sold less than 15% of their Y1 target (400,000 vs 3 MM) All the reports online reflect actual vs. expected more around 450-500k vs. 800k - 1M, not 3 million. > the reported shareholder near-revolts The stock market's reaction to the Vision Pro announcement saw Apple's shares dip by 3%, indicating a mix of investor optimism and concern, not revolt. [1] https://www.wsj.com/tech/personal-tech/apple-vision-pro-software-sales-fec324c0 https://www.wsj.com/tech/personal-tech/apple-vision-pro-soft...
  - dagmx 2y ago
    I think both you and the person you’re responding to are correct. The supply chain reports said <1M displays producible. That’s <500K devices producible. Regarding stock, Apple almost always dips by a significant amount during an event. They’re very much traded as buying on the hype and selling on the news.
CameronBanga 2y ago
All supply chain reports before the release were in line with the fact that the in-headset screens were capped at 1million maximum production possible for the first year, and two screens are required for each headset. 3MM was never possible, not sure where you got these numbers.

troupo 2y ago

So, a developer should spend ~$5000 with no chance of ROI on the off chance that at some undefined point in the future this will pay off when they would have to spend another ~$5000 developing for the newer/cheaper/whatever device?

jsheard 2y ago

The rumor mill is saying it will be cheaper... but still not cheap at ~$2000. https://www.uploadvr.com/non-pro-apple-vision-headset-reportedly-2000/ https://www.uploadvr.com/non-pro-apple-vision-headset-report... Meta is having enough trouble attracting developers with hardware that's an order of magnitude cheaper and has two orders of magnitude more units in the wild. They got through the first hurdle of convincing people to try VR but keep falling at the second hurdle of user retention, headsets that are gathering dust in a closet don't make any money for developers. Apples decision to go all-in on hand tracking compounds the software problem even further because the vast majority of VR software that has already been developed is designed around controllers with IMUs/buttons/sticks/triggers/haptics, and would be very difficult to port over to the Vision Pros much more limited control scheme.

bee_rider 2y ago
Apple does have the advantage of being able to project their 2D apps if they want, right? A $5k device seems like a dead end, and a $2k one seems pretty rough still (unless it totally replaces your laptop, which might make it worth considering). They clearly haven’t executed it correctly yet. But at least they do have some hope of beating the bootstrapping problem that everybody else seems to have—they could try and get users first, and then I bet developers would quickly follow.
- marxisttemp 2y ago
  > Apple does have the advantage of being able to project their 2D apps if they want, right? Developers have to manually check a box to enable running the iPad version of their app on visionOS so it’s entirely out of Apple’s hands. Not sure why they took this approach
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Likely some sort of legal or PR reason.
  - dagmx 2y ago
    It’s the opposite of your claim. It’s opt out, not opt in. > Your iPhone and iPad apps will be made available to users on Apple Vision Pro, unless you edit your apps’ availability in the App Store Connect https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-your-apps-availability/manage-availability-of-iphone-and-ipad-apps-on-apple-vision-pro/ https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-yo... And it makes sense for some devs to not provide their app on the platform if they use unsupported APIs or if their experience is otherwise degraded for some unknowable reason. Though the side effect is Netflix and YouTube can just withhold their apps that presumably otherwise work.

jncfhnb 2y ago

Could hit double digits next time

moolcool 2y ago

You're still making a big assumption that this is a device anybody actually wants in the first place. How many of the people who bought one of these actually still use them with any regularity?

Cthulhu_ 2y ago

Familiarity is fine, but don't bet your livelihood on it just yet; have enough knowledge to be able to pivot to it if it does take off. But I'm not seeing it.

jayd16 2y ago

I doubt it... The platform seems like a dud without some big changes. If big changes are coming, how much time to market do you really save working on this iteration?

layer8 2y ago

The platform has no killer mainstream use-case besides watching movies on a big virtual screen in solitude, with the drawback of having a heavy headset strapped to your face. I doubt that it would fare very well even sub-$1000. If they invested in gaming and allowed 3D controllers, the story might be different.