3
Apple doesn’t want want you to buy their headset (opinion) (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by M500@lemmy.ml to c/apple@lemmy.ml
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So, there are only a few apps for the headset at the moment and they are all first party. Apple needs developers to make apps for the headset before they start selling it in mass.

If they do not have apps for it, then people will see a “dead” ecosystem and possibly view it as a failed product.

They priced it at a point where consumers won’t really get it, but devs will. At least larger devs will. Selling it, shows the devs that it’s ready for the market and encourages them to get in early so they can possibly catch the wave of new users.

Once there are a decent amount and variety of apps for the headset, they will sell a slightly trimmed down version for significantly less.

What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] DJDarren@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have a hard time picturing VR becoming mainstream when the headsets are still heavy.

Added to this, something Quinn Nelson said; in all the footage we saw of Vision Pro being used it leaves the question of why use that device? Why would you strap on a hat to shitpost on your socials when you can just use your phone? The one solid use-case that interested me was being able to sit in your own IMAX cinema, but is that really worth $3500?

Don't get me wrong, the thing looks damn cool, and I can't wait to try one out. But yeah, it seems like you have to want to choose to use VP over just having an iPad in your hands.

[-] snowman@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

VR sporting events. I’d love to watch an away game with great seats w/o flying there, getting a hotel, etc. Of course it’s not the exact same but it’s so much cheaper.

One single away game trip can easily cost as much as the headset. Only an in-person demo will really decide if the experience is worth it.

[-] borari@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

...why use that device? ... The one solid use-case that interested me was being able to sit in your own IMAX cinema, but is that really worth $3500?

Except this device isn't being marketed as an iPhone or iPad replacement. The closest thing to it replacing is a MacBook, but it's not being marketed as a MacBook replacement either. It seems to me like it's a blend between a MacBook Air replacement and a Pro Display XDR/general monitor replacement. A good OLED ultra wide monitor is above $1,000. A Pro Display XDR is $5,000-$6,000. With the Vision Pro, you could theoretically never buy a monitor again. I've bought two ergotron monitor arms at $200 each just to be able to move my monitors around a fraction of the amount that you can move windows inside Vision Pro. I don't think the price is out of line, and I do think there is a pretty obvious use case here. It's a monitor replacement for stationary computer use, with the option of limited portability. With a battery life of 2 hours it seems pretty obvious to me that mobile use wasn't Apple's priority with this.

this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

Apple

4990 readers
1 users here now

Here you can talk about Apple's ecosystem, Apple's OSs (Operating Systems), Apple's apps, Apple's everything!!

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
LucasDondo@lemmy.ml