4 ms·

2012 Google Glasses were already a market signal. (ouch, to think Apple is a decade late here). Galaxy XR are again a signal. Also serves to keep VR people emp

by hu3 1y ago

2012 Google Glasses were already a market signal. (ouch, to think Apple is a decade late here). Galaxy XR are again a signal. Also serves to keep VR people employed.

dangus 1y ago
This just means that Samsung/Google and Apple both profoundly misunderstand the market. Meta Ray-Bans are a successful product that has a clear understanding of use case and effectively delivers a normal product with appealing aesthetics. Google glass could have led to that much earlier but the product looked like headgear for braces and the product concept was abandoned prematurely. Galaxy XR is a late response to Vision Pro which itself is a late response to Meta Quest/Steam VR devices. The HTC Vive and Valve Index were the market signals, but that market signal has already proven to be something of a false one by the time Apple and Google got around to playing in the space. There is really no market for general purpose computing VR devices. You are either gaming (niche), watching movies alone (niche again, rich but lonely Vision Pro users), or you’re taking POV pictures/video and doing light voice assistant/AI type tasks (Meta Ray-Bans, which are broadly appealing and even function as regular glasses for basically the same price as regular glasses). Unsurprisingly, the only true hit with growing sales out of the use cases is the Meta Ray-Bans. Let’s not forget that even the best headsets like Vision Pro are useless for a large chunk of people who get motion sick from them. The successful product concept is the Meta Ray-Bans, and it’s crazy to me that they have zero competition especially from Apple who is all over customizable fashion wearables with the Apple Watch. The Vision Pro and Galaxy XR should have been cancelled.
- Agraillo 1y ago
  > The successful product concept is the Meta Ray-Bans, and it’s crazy to me that they have zero competition especially from Apple This is my pure speculation, but it seems like for a product like this there is no ideal path for Apple. Two scenarios (there may be more): * Make it an evolutionary experience, mostly regarding the apps. It's like how the iPad and iWatch related to the iPhone. Both projects were successful for many reasons, but having thousands of apps continue working and adding new value was definitely one of them. But in this case, Apple needs to invent these new values, which is not so easy. For example, a visual notification device is one of the use cases (like now you get notifications directly to your eyes from dozens of existing apps), but this use case is not big enough to be an anchor. * Make it a revolutionary device, like the iPhone was. So mostly new use cases, apps, SDK, etc. But this requires time, resources, and Jobs's skills to make it work. And what's interesting, many of the potential "revolutionary" use cases are definitely not for everyone, which would make this project less appealing for Apple. For example, I can imagine a digital/AI assistant recording/decoding everything around you and working as your second brain/memory device. I'm sure Stephen Wolfram will be one of the first users of such a device (see his own description of his everyday life [1]), but I'm not sure there will be millions of such users. According to some leaks and hints, probably the second path is currently underway at Apple. But it needs time for both the hardware and software parts. Maybe even more time for the software. [1] https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-productive-life-some-details-of-my-personal-infrastructure/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-prod...
  - dangus 1y ago
    We gotta stop with the Steve Jobs cult. It doesn’t require Jobs’ skills. It requires a company with good management that knows how to determine product vision. I’m not even asking for Apple to be “revolutionary,” I really think they just need to sit down and map out a buyer persona and take the time to understand who is buying their new product and why. They obviously didn’t do that with the Vision Pro, they chased technology for technology’s sake out of fear that a new competitor might get their own App Store.

by hu3 1y ago

2012 Google Glasses were already a market signal. (ouch, to think Apple is a decade late here). Galaxy XR are again a signal. Also serves to keep VR people employed.

dangus 1y ago

This just means that Samsung/Google and Apple both profoundly misunderstand the market. Meta Ray-Bans are a successful product that has a clear understanding of use case and effectively delivers a normal product with appealing aesthetics. Google glass could have led to that much earlier but the product looked like headgear for braces and the product concept was abandoned prematurely. Galaxy XR is a late response to Vision Pro which itself is a late response to Meta Quest/Steam VR devices. The HTC Vive and Valve Index were the market signals, but that market signal has already proven to be something of a false one by the time Apple and Google got around to playing in the space. There is really no market for general purpose computing VR devices. You are either gaming (niche), watching movies alone (niche again, rich but lonely Vision Pro users), or you’re taking POV pictures/video and doing light voice assistant/AI type tasks (Meta Ray-Bans, which are broadly appealing and even function as regular glasses for basically the same price as regular glasses). Unsurprisingly, the only true hit with growing sales out of the use cases is the Meta Ray-Bans. Let’s not forget that even the best headsets like Vision Pro are useless for a large chunk of people who get motion sick from them. The successful product concept is the Meta Ray-Bans, and it’s crazy to me that they have zero competition especially from Apple who is all over customizable fashion wearables with the Apple Watch. The Vision Pro and Galaxy XR should have been cancelled.

Agraillo 1y ago
> The successful product concept is the Meta Ray-Bans, and it’s crazy to me that they have zero competition especially from Apple This is my pure speculation, but it seems like for a product like this there is no ideal path for Apple. Two scenarios (there may be more): * Make it an evolutionary experience, mostly regarding the apps. It's like how the iPad and iWatch related to the iPhone. Both projects were successful for many reasons, but having thousands of apps continue working and adding new value was definitely one of them. But in this case, Apple needs to invent these new values, which is not so easy. For example, a visual notification device is one of the use cases (like now you get notifications directly to your eyes from dozens of existing apps), but this use case is not big enough to be an anchor. * Make it a revolutionary device, like the iPhone was. So mostly new use cases, apps, SDK, etc. But this requires time, resources, and Jobs's skills to make it work. And what's interesting, many of the potential "revolutionary" use cases are definitely not for everyone, which would make this project less appealing for Apple. For example, I can imagine a digital/AI assistant recording/decoding everything around you and working as your second brain/memory device. I'm sure Stephen Wolfram will be one of the first users of such a device (see his own description of his everyday life [1]), but I'm not sure there will be millions of such users. According to some leaks and hints, probably the second path is currently underway at Apple. But it needs time for both the hardware and software parts. Maybe even more time for the software. [1] https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-productive-life-some-details-of-my-personal-infrastructure/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-prod...
- dangus 1y ago
  We gotta stop with the Steve Jobs cult. It doesn’t require Jobs’ skills. It requires a company with good management that knows how to determine product vision. I’m not even asking for Apple to be “revolutionary,” I really think they just need to sit down and map out a buyer persona and take the time to understand who is buying their new product and why. They obviously didn’t do that with the Vision Pro, they chased technology for technology’s sake out of fear that a new competitor might get their own App Store.