Quote from: MichaelNotMichael on January 14, 2024, 00:15:21But I'm damn glad they're trying.

Trying to artificially make the need for something no one wants nor needs. Trying to make a load of money for overpriced useless junk that's basically an iPad slapped on one's face (iPad is at least extremely versatile and useful product, both for fun and productivity). Yep, they are trying.

the foldable junk google android tablet phone thing is basically TWO THOUSAND dollars. consider me fooled but this is a steal compared to that garbage. wow, we folded a tablet and put android in it, give me 2000 dollars , your welcome, google.

How can the author write an article about how this is the "wrong product", without mentioning the "right product" that are coming out at the same time: lightweight smart eyeglasses?

It's blindingly obvious that the form factor "looks like regular eyeglasses instead of a computer strapped to your face" is what most people would want. And is what will finally take this beyond a niche market.

"nothing actually new at all", repeated ad nauseam.

This probably sounds familiar to anyone who was paying attention in 2007. Despite the tiny footprint of AR and VR in 2024, people familiar with today's market consider themselves experts in what it will take for the technology to become more mainstream.

I have no idea whether Apple will succeed (and, apparently unlike the author, I admit it). But I'm damn glad they're trying.

The price is right. People buy Gucci and Balenciaga BECAUSE of their unreasonably high prices, not in spite of it. Vision Pro will be sold out and people will proudly show their friends this headset. But if it were $700 and plastic with exactly the same functionality (which is objectively better, lighter), nobody would want that, only enthusiasts.

And then AFTER rich people make Apple headset fashionable, they could release a cheaper one to sell to people who could actually afford them.

It's a decent write up but the author doesn't seem to consider that it's a developer/enthusiast product. There will probably be a version in two - three years that with tech advances and streamlining will be much lighter and less bulky and priced more like an iphone. And I don't get the hate toward the puck, it's a good idea to keep it off the user's head, in fact I wish they'd just let the user use an iphone as the brains, with a couple specialized chips on the device, to make it more like a pair of glasses, a peripheral. But this is Apple, they like to make a device for every category rather than x-in-1 devices.

Still in the end it's a strange product for Apple, I think XR is super interesting but it's kind of dystopian, their typical plasticky advertising and "eyesight" tries to defray that but it's hard to get away from the solitary and anti-social impression of wearing a bulky pair of goggles on your head around the house. They are pretty desperately trying to find a new category to cash in on and this is what they arrived at.

What? No comments on this article yet? Sure - I'll jump in... :)

While there is a segment of the population (fanboi's) that think that anything and everything Apple releases is both revolutionary and outstanding here's a prime example that those folks opinions are rather absurd.

Lets call a spade a spade and a turd of a product - well a turd.

Apple fanboi's have been waiting for decades for Apple to release a gaming system however instead they have given us <sic> "AppleTV" and now Vision Pro.

When a inexpensive Chinese $40 'Smart Watch' works better and lasts longer on a charge then any of the Apple products one has to wonder WTF is Apple doing with all that money it is making?