3 ms·

Don't bother developing for this platform. The customer base is miniscule. A good hockey player don't skate to where the puck is. He skates to where it will be

Don't bother developing for this platform. The customer base is miniscule. A good hockey player don't skate to where the puck is. He skates to where it will be.

brudgers 2y ago
50% of hockey players are below average.
- coolspot 2y ago
  * median, below median
bee_rider 2y ago
I mean… I think Apple hasn’t totally missed VR, and is still the only company that seems to have much of a chance of making it work… But, a good hockey player doesn’t skate in the direction that absolutely nobody else is heading, somewhere that might even be outside the rink (in the sense that we haven’t really shown if a good UI for VR can actually be created, yet, so it might not even be a possible “part of the game,” so to speak).
- reaperducer 2y ago
  a good hockey player doesn’t skate in the direction that absolutely nobody else is heading That doesn't make sense in this context. Unless you consider Meta, Loft Dynamics, Valve, HTC, and dozens of other companies to be "absolutely nobody."
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    I think VR is not a serious business for Meta, just something Zuck is doing for fun. Why not, rich enough to goof off, right? They spent $4b to make $400M on their headsets. A better business model would probably be to pay people a couple hundred dollars to take their headsets. At least that might result in some install base.
lapcat 2y ago
> A good hockey player don't skate to where the puck is. I'm not a hockey player. > He skates to where it will be. The time scale for hockey players is seconds, not years. This is such a useless cliché. Most developers have very limited resources. Apple can afford to invest in pipe dreams (reportedly they spent $billions working on the now cancelled car project), but I certainly can't.
- reaperducer 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - KronisLV 2y ago
    While your point is valid, I think the opposite might be as well. Just ask the people who were developing games for Stadia: https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/30/23381106/google-stadia-shutdown-shocked-developers-too https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/30/23381106/google-stadia-sh... > News that Google would be closing down Stadia was a big surprise for everyone, including the developers making games for the platform. Now, Apple can probably pull off a lot of stuff, but with how quickly products get killed nowadays, sometimes you might end up betting on a future that will never come to pass.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      That comes with the territory though. The mere possibility of a 10x profit likely entails the possibility of a 10x risk somewhere, borne by someone, or groups of someones.
    - GeekyBear 2y ago
      > with how quickly products get killed nowadays Apple's history is to pick a strategic product direction and then continue to iterate on their hardware and software for that product year after year. For instance, Apple Watch. Throwing products over the wall and killing them if they don't prove to be an immediate success is more if a Google/Microsoft thing. Although it's fair to point out that Microsoft did at least update HoloLens hardware once before they killed it. The issue with both HoloLens and Vision Pro is the nearly identical price point. You aren't going to see mass market sales figures until you can reach mass market price points.
madeofpalk 2y ago
I'm doubtful this is where the puck will be.

Don't bother developing for this platform. The customer base is miniscule. A good hockey player don't skate to where the puck is. He skates to where it will be.

brudgers 2y ago

50% of hockey players are below average.

coolspot 2y ago
* median, below median

bee_rider 2y ago

I mean… I think Apple hasn’t totally missed VR, and is still the only company that seems to have much of a chance of making it work… But, a good hockey player doesn’t skate in the direction that absolutely nobody else is heading, somewhere that might even be outside the rink (in the sense that we haven’t really shown if a good UI for VR can actually be created, yet, so it might not even be a possible “part of the game,” so to speak).

reaperducer 2y ago
a good hockey player doesn’t skate in the direction that absolutely nobody else is heading That doesn't make sense in this context. Unless you consider Meta, Loft Dynamics, Valve, HTC, and dozens of other companies to be "absolutely nobody."
- bee_rider 2y ago
  I think VR is not a serious business for Meta, just something Zuck is doing for fun. Why not, rich enough to goof off, right? They spent $4b to make $400M on their headsets. A better business model would probably be to pay people a couple hundred dollars to take their headsets. At least that might result in some install base.

lapcat 2y ago

> A good hockey player don't skate to where the puck is. I'm not a hockey player. > He skates to where it will be. The time scale for hockey players is seconds, not years. This is such a useless cliché. Most developers have very limited resources. Apple can afford to invest in pipe dreams (reportedly they spent $billions working on the now cancelled car project), but I certainly can't.

reaperducer 2y ago
[flagged]
- KronisLV 2y ago
  While your point is valid, I think the opposite might be as well. Just ask the people who were developing games for Stadia: https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/30/23381106/google-stadia-shutdown-shocked-developers-too https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/30/23381106/google-stadia-sh... > News that Google would be closing down Stadia was a big surprise for everyone, including the developers making games for the platform. Now, Apple can probably pull off a lot of stuff, but with how quickly products get killed nowadays, sometimes you might end up betting on a future that will never come to pass.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    That comes with the territory though. The mere possibility of a 10x profit likely entails the possibility of a 10x risk somewhere, borne by someone, or groups of someones.
  - GeekyBear 2y ago
    > with how quickly products get killed nowadays Apple's history is to pick a strategic product direction and then continue to iterate on their hardware and software for that product year after year. For instance, Apple Watch. Throwing products over the wall and killing them if they don't prove to be an immediate success is more if a Google/Microsoft thing. Although it's fair to point out that Microsoft did at least update HoloLens hardware once before they killed it. The issue with both HoloLens and Vision Pro is the nearly identical price point. You aren't going to see mass market sales figures until you can reach mass market price points.

madeofpalk 2y ago

I'm doubtful this is where the puck will be.