2 ms·

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/

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.