17 ms·

One of the commenters was thinking the same thing as me > People are going to only read the headline and interpret it as “discontinue”. Like the article says,

One of the commenters was thinking the same thing as me > People are going to only read the headline and interpret it as “discontinue”. Like the article says, it just means they have enough inventory until they replace it with something cheaper. [https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/report-apple-may-stop-producing-vision-pro-by-the-end-of-2024.2440767/post-33507400#post-33507400 https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/report-apple-may-stop-p...] I wonder how Apple would go through with this, hopefully with a better form.

SoftTalker 2y ago
Maybe they are finding that they're like the Segway, just too geeky for the mainstream market.
- alberth 2y ago
  Probably more like "what would I use this for" is a basic question that can't be answered right now. Time will tell if a "killer app" is found.
  - steveBK123 2y ago
    Yeah it really feels like a devkit they sold in hopes someone would come up with the killer app because they hadn't figured it out themselves yet. It's a shame as it seems like they maxed out the tech specs, but given the state of the art it still ends up being too low resolution for true MacOS productivity replacement, while also being too heavy & tethered to a short lived battery pack. Maybe a worse-is-better version that is cheaper/lighter will sell more for entertainment uses.
    - bee_rider 2y ago
      I guess if they just called it a devkit, nobody would have bought it. But, with the specs, price, and the ridiculous form factor, it was a devkit in all but name.
      - mrguyorama 2y ago
        Except there is so little investment in devs and the ecosystem that even as a devkit it falls flat. VR/AR is a teensy niche of simulation enthusiasts and a large group of people who essentially play 30 minutes of beat saber occasionally. That's not exactly a thriving market, and Apple explicitly eschewed that market entirely, because nobody sims on a mac anything, and there are no controllers to play beat saber with. Where are the grants to devs to buy and develop something good for it? Apple just kind of expected everyone to do that work for free for them. Watching movies on an airplane is not a $3500 use case. Mirroring your desktop to a head mounted display that is too heavy and cumbersome to be a $3500 use case. Putting iPad apps into the air is not a $3500 use case. Where's the killer app? What even IS a killer app for head mounted displays? They've been around for 30 years now. It has never been an insufficient hardware problem. The original oculus devkits were genuinely terrible, but VR IS a killer app for sim enthusiasts, so they rushed to implement it into everything they could straight away. Euro Truck Simulator was one of the earliest integrations. But that's not an Apple market and never will be. If someone wants VR/AR to be some stupid ShadowRun heads up display for managing all the info you encounter in the world, that app should be built and iterated on first. How many average people even run an "organize and remember everything" app? What percentage of iPhone users even use the damn calendar?
        bee_rider 2y ago
        I’d like Apple Maps to show up in my field of view. In that case I could even not have a phone at all. (But not like $3500 want). I agree that nobody has found a really good use case. I do wonder to what extent that is just because nobody has released an AR headset that you’d wear outside.
        steveBK123 2y ago
        That's the kind of HUD UX that a lower res/contrast/illumination overlay could accomplish like the Meta Orion prototype.
        rahoulb 2y ago
        I have done that with XReal glasses and my phone. But they still look kind of off when wearing them in public (slightly bigger than normal sunglasses, cable from one ear and other people can see the light from the screens from the side or back). And the lack of integration is a pain - the phone has to be unlocked so is subject to random taps and swipes in my pocket. However, an Apple-built Carplay-style projection into XReal type glasses could work very well - the question being how would you control it?
    - dawnerd 2y ago
      Exactly. They need to cut the price in half and focus on entertainment. Thats the only thing I hear friends talk about who still use theirs AVP. Wearing it longer than a movie becomes too strenuous.
      - alberth 2y ago
        > They need to cut the price in half My guess, Apple knows this won't become mainstream/usage for 5+ years. And as such, they need to bring technology from the future 5-years from now, to today ... and as such, that's why it's so expensive. They aren't expecting people to pay $3,500 for this device when the killer app exists. But it needs to cost that in order for developers to "develop to where the puck is going" in 5-years time.
- valianteffort 2y ago
  No they're just overspec'd and overpriced. If their goal was to ultimately release a consumer level device, they shouldn't have gone overboard with tech that has limited room for cost cutting. It's typical of Apple's hubris, to throw in all these features they think people will want, meanwhile if the headset had no cameras and was just a display strapped to your head for $1000, it likely would have sold a lot better. But they didn't want a VR device for whatever reason. At the same time you could blame discretionary spending being at some of the lowest levels in a decade.
  - mimsee 2y ago
    Isn't it part of the Apple way to release expensive and weird products at times to keep Apple in the minds of people as a luxury brand. Things like $400 wheels for Mac Pro or the $1000 stand for the external display. I can see AVP as being half luxury and half tech-demo/devkit for a more budget friendly device.
    - latexr 2y ago
      > to keep Apple in the minds of people as a luxury brand. Things like $400 wheels for Mac Pro or the $1000 stand for the external display. I have never seen anyone look at those two examples and think “luxury”. Even the most ardent proponents of Apple products laugh at those prices and think they are absurd. With good reason. Who ever is going to look at computer wheels and think they’re a sign of luxury¹? ¹ Yes yes, someone surely will, just like there’s someone for everything. I’m making a general point.
      - ToucanLoucan 2y ago
        Rich tech fetishists. I worked for one for several years and he had every fancy Apple gadget they ever made. On a positive note, I frequently got his castoffs when he got bored with them.
        latexr 2y ago
        That was directly addressed by the footnote.
- dartos 2y ago
  Segway had a slew of high profile injuries that damaged its brand. Then encouraging people to wear helmets on them made people look too geeky. People love their electric scooters nowadays, and they’re just worse Segways. Apples headset is expensive and has no compelling software for most people. It was DOA.
  - steveBK123 2y ago
    Segway was in a sense ahead of its time and trying to create a new market segment. The early problems were it was illegal to use them on sidewalks but also there weren't bike lanes like there are in big cities now. It was also pretty big & heavy it didn't work for multi-modal like using it for the last mile to/from a train or bus. So the e-mobility space got won decades later by worse, cheaper products that were smaller & lighter .. being used heavily for food delivery app drivers using them semi-legally in bike lanes. A use case that wasn't imagined in the Segway unveiling.
  - andrewla 2y ago
    "high profile injuries" is a wonderful understatement. The most notable "injury" being the death of the president of the company while riding his Segway [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Heselden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Heselden
    - TylerE 2y ago
      That wasn’t until much, much later though. That was like 3 buyouts in.
      - andrewla 2y ago
        Maybe ... he bought it out in 2009, which was also when Paul Blart: Mall Cop came out, which served as a eulogy for any chances of dignity for the Segway
        TylerE 2y ago
        Segway was introduced in 2001 and went on sale in 2002. By 2010 it was very much on a downslope.
- m463 2y ago
  I think segway was an interesting idea, but electric scooters seem to have stuck.
rchaud 2y ago
Effectively, there's no real difference. The model is discontinued, the article says they've produced their last batch and are focused on making a cheaper one. Apple is free to continue selling what they have in inventory.
- fckgw 2y ago
  They have produced their last batch for now. They are free to resume production if needed. From TFA: >Apple will still be able to resume Vision Pro production if sales pick up since the production lines are not yet due to be dismantled. If the item is still on Apple's website it's not discontinued.
- latexr 2y ago
  > Effectively, there's no real difference. The model is discontinued. There is a huge difference. My interpretation is that the GP is making the point that with just the headline people will think the product as a whole was discontinued, not just this first version.
  - rchaud 2y ago
    Considering the number of people Apple marketing is able to reach, compared to the MacRumors website --- I really don't think it will have that kind of deleterious impact on people's interest in Apple VR. That said, Apple marketing has been mostly dead silent since the product announcement 1.5 years ago.
  - ghusto 2y ago
    My prediction is that they will "continue" the product as a different product, maintaining the name. A bit like how the Macbook Air is still a product, whilst we all know it was discontinued some years ago.
    - tiltowait 2y ago
      I’m not sure I follow. It has a different form factor now, but it still follows the same design ethos as the original model. It’s not like, say, the Ford Ranger, which had a long gap of non-production before being “brought back” in a different product category from the original.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Molitor5901 2y ago
That's a good point but.. if they have enough inventory that almost points to a sign that inventory is not moving. They may stop producing them until they figure a way (an app) to spark a buying trend.
vessenes 2y ago
This. The hardware and R&D investment won’t go to waste. I’d love a much lower friction version of Vision OS that could successfully get a high res screen in AR. Probably a few more years. Or maybe 10. :) Anyway, I’m curious what Apple will do next, and I’m looking forward to trying those facebook glasses as well. I think there’s almost certainly some tipping point of usefulness and form factor where AR becomes something that’s an “obvious next step, in retrospect” — but I don’t think the bulk, (lack of) comfort and weirdness of not seeing the eyes are winners for the AVP in the long run. I still pack mine for flying though — love it on a plane.
isodev 2y ago
I really wish this wasn't yet another platform war. There are already countless Quest devices, apps and games out there. Also, it will be very hard for Apple to beat the Quest 3S price point, we just got 4 headsets so we can all play together.

SoftTalker 2y ago

Maybe they are finding that they're like the Segway, just too geeky for the mainstream market.

alberth 2y ago
Probably more like "what would I use this for" is a basic question that can't be answered right now. Time will tell if a "killer app" is found.
- steveBK123 2y ago
  Yeah it really feels like a devkit they sold in hopes someone would come up with the killer app because they hadn't figured it out themselves yet. It's a shame as it seems like they maxed out the tech specs, but given the state of the art it still ends up being too low resolution for true MacOS productivity replacement, while also being too heavy & tethered to a short lived battery pack. Maybe a worse-is-better version that is cheaper/lighter will sell more for entertainment uses.
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    I guess if they just called it a devkit, nobody would have bought it. But, with the specs, price, and the ridiculous form factor, it was a devkit in all but name.
    - mrguyorama 2y ago
      Except there is so little investment in devs and the ecosystem that even as a devkit it falls flat. VR/AR is a teensy niche of simulation enthusiasts and a large group of people who essentially play 30 minutes of beat saber occasionally. That's not exactly a thriving market, and Apple explicitly eschewed that market entirely, because nobody sims on a mac anything, and there are no controllers to play beat saber with. Where are the grants to devs to buy and develop something good for it? Apple just kind of expected everyone to do that work for free for them. Watching movies on an airplane is not a $3500 use case. Mirroring your desktop to a head mounted display that is too heavy and cumbersome to be a $3500 use case. Putting iPad apps into the air is not a $3500 use case. Where's the killer app? What even IS a killer app for head mounted displays? They've been around for 30 years now. It has never been an insufficient hardware problem. The original oculus devkits were genuinely terrible, but VR IS a killer app for sim enthusiasts, so they rushed to implement it into everything they could straight away. Euro Truck Simulator was one of the earliest integrations. But that's not an Apple market and never will be. If someone wants VR/AR to be some stupid ShadowRun heads up display for managing all the info you encounter in the world, that app should be built and iterated on first. How many average people even run an "organize and remember everything" app? What percentage of iPhone users even use the damn calendar?
      - bee_rider 2y ago
        I’d like Apple Maps to show up in my field of view. In that case I could even not have a phone at all. (But not like $3500 want). I agree that nobody has found a really good use case. I do wonder to what extent that is just because nobody has released an AR headset that you’d wear outside.
        steveBK123 2y ago
        That's the kind of HUD UX that a lower res/contrast/illumination overlay could accomplish like the Meta Orion prototype.
        rahoulb 2y ago
        I have done that with XReal glasses and my phone. But they still look kind of off when wearing them in public (slightly bigger than normal sunglasses, cable from one ear and other people can see the light from the screens from the side or back). And the lack of integration is a pain - the phone has to be unlocked so is subject to random taps and swipes in my pocket. However, an Apple-built Carplay-style projection into XReal type glasses could work very well - the question being how would you control it?
  - dawnerd 2y ago
    Exactly. They need to cut the price in half and focus on entertainment. Thats the only thing I hear friends talk about who still use theirs AVP. Wearing it longer than a movie becomes too strenuous.
    - alberth 2y ago
      > They need to cut the price in half My guess, Apple knows this won't become mainstream/usage for 5+ years. And as such, they need to bring technology from the future 5-years from now, to today ... and as such, that's why it's so expensive. They aren't expecting people to pay $3,500 for this device when the killer app exists. But it needs to cost that in order for developers to "develop to where the puck is going" in 5-years time.
valianteffort 2y ago
No they're just overspec'd and overpriced. If their goal was to ultimately release a consumer level device, they shouldn't have gone overboard with tech that has limited room for cost cutting. It's typical of Apple's hubris, to throw in all these features they think people will want, meanwhile if the headset had no cameras and was just a display strapped to your head for $1000, it likely would have sold a lot better. But they didn't want a VR device for whatever reason. At the same time you could blame discretionary spending being at some of the lowest levels in a decade.
- mimsee 2y ago
  Isn't it part of the Apple way to release expensive and weird products at times to keep Apple in the minds of people as a luxury brand. Things like $400 wheels for Mac Pro or the $1000 stand for the external display. I can see AVP as being half luxury and half tech-demo/devkit for a more budget friendly device.
  - latexr 2y ago
    > to keep Apple in the minds of people as a luxury brand. Things like $400 wheels for Mac Pro or the $1000 stand for the external display. I have never seen anyone look at those two examples and think “luxury”. Even the most ardent proponents of Apple products laugh at those prices and think they are absurd. With good reason. Who ever is going to look at computer wheels and think they’re a sign of luxury¹? ¹ Yes yes, someone surely will, just like there’s someone for everything. I’m making a general point.
    - ToucanLoucan 2y ago
      Rich tech fetishists. I worked for one for several years and he had every fancy Apple gadget they ever made. On a positive note, I frequently got his castoffs when he got bored with them.
      - latexr 2y ago
        That was directly addressed by the footnote.
dartos 2y ago
Segway had a slew of high profile injuries that damaged its brand. Then encouraging people to wear helmets on them made people look too geeky. People love their electric scooters nowadays, and they’re just worse Segways. Apples headset is expensive and has no compelling software for most people. It was DOA.
- steveBK123 2y ago
  Segway was in a sense ahead of its time and trying to create a new market segment. The early problems were it was illegal to use them on sidewalks but also there weren't bike lanes like there are in big cities now. It was also pretty big & heavy it didn't work for multi-modal like using it for the last mile to/from a train or bus. So the e-mobility space got won decades later by worse, cheaper products that were smaller & lighter .. being used heavily for food delivery app drivers using them semi-legally in bike lanes. A use case that wasn't imagined in the Segway unveiling.
- andrewla 2y ago
  "high profile injuries" is a wonderful understatement. The most notable "injury" being the death of the president of the company while riding his Segway [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Heselden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Heselden
  - TylerE 2y ago
    That wasn’t until much, much later though. That was like 3 buyouts in.
    - andrewla 2y ago
      Maybe ... he bought it out in 2009, which was also when Paul Blart: Mall Cop came out, which served as a eulogy for any chances of dignity for the Segway
      - TylerE 2y ago
        Segway was introduced in 2001 and went on sale in 2002. By 2010 it was very much on a downslope.
m463 2y ago
I think segway was an interesting idea, but electric scooters seem to have stuck.

rchaud 2y ago

Effectively, there's no real difference. The model is discontinued, the article says they've produced their last batch and are focused on making a cheaper one. Apple is free to continue selling what they have in inventory.

fckgw 2y ago
They have produced their last batch for now. They are free to resume production if needed. From TFA: >Apple will still be able to resume Vision Pro production if sales pick up since the production lines are not yet due to be dismantled. If the item is still on Apple's website it's not discontinued.
latexr 2y ago
> Effectively, there's no real difference. The model is discontinued. There is a huge difference. My interpretation is that the GP is making the point that with just the headline people will think the product as a whole was discontinued, not just this first version.
- rchaud 2y ago
  Considering the number of people Apple marketing is able to reach, compared to the MacRumors website --- I really don't think it will have that kind of deleterious impact on people's interest in Apple VR. That said, Apple marketing has been mostly dead silent since the product announcement 1.5 years ago.
- ghusto 2y ago
  My prediction is that they will "continue" the product as a different product, maintaining the name. A bit like how the Macbook Air is still a product, whilst we all know it was discontinued some years ago.
  - tiltowait 2y ago
    I’m not sure I follow. It has a different form factor now, but it still follows the same design ethos as the original model. It’s not like, say, the Ford Ranger, which had a long gap of non-production before being “brought back” in a different product category from the original.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Molitor5901 2y ago

That's a good point but.. if they have enough inventory that almost points to a sign that inventory is not moving. They may stop producing them until they figure a way (an app) to spark a buying trend.

vessenes 2y ago

This. The hardware and R&D investment won’t go to waste. I’d love a much lower friction version of Vision OS that could successfully get a high res screen in AR. Probably a few more years. Or maybe 10. :) Anyway, I’m curious what Apple will do next, and I’m looking forward to trying those facebook glasses as well. I think there’s almost certainly some tipping point of usefulness and form factor where AR becomes something that’s an “obvious next step, in retrospect” — but I don’t think the bulk, (lack of) comfort and weirdness of not seeing the eyes are winners for the AVP in the long run. I still pack mine for flying though — love it on a plane.

isodev 2y ago

I really wish this wasn't yet another platform war. There are already countless Quest devices, apps and games out there. Also, it will be very hard for Apple to beat the Quest 3S price point, we just got 4 headsets so we can all play together.