theo2112 t1_iyxxs9b wrote
Reply to comment by NextFaithlessness7 in Kuo: Apple Headset Shipments Potentially Delayed (Again) Until Second Half of 2023 by BiscuitOfGinger
And it will perform twice as well, sell twice as many, and define the category. See: mp3 player, smart phone, tablet, smart watch/wearable, and so on.
This is the playbook. See what the competition is doing. Find a way to improve the experience, not the spec sheet, release the product touting the use case. Profit.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
Madholm t1_iyyakz1 wrote
With the current state of Meta and the general ‘meh’ status of VR gaming, why should Apple even be in a hurry to push out a product?
PrivatePilot9 t1_iyyekyn wrote
Because Apple has been quietly watching from the sidelines, collecting data on the “meh” experience, and fixing what makes it “meh” to begin with.
See above comments. This is what they do, and they do it well.
Madholm t1_iyyg7ht wrote
No, there just isn’t a market for it. Even best use scenarios like gaming doesn’t have consumers biting on the tech and gamers will buy just about anything.
You think that just because it’s Apple that will change? Sorry man, this isn’t an MP3 player, phone, watch, headphones type situation where Apple can capitalize. It’s a severely floundering hardware segment and small things like cutting the cables to make it wireless and more user friendly isn’t going to solve the problems with the platform.
What I mean is that Apple is going to have to reinvent the wheel for this one to be a success, because there is nothing compelling to build from at the moment. Microsoft actually has a somewhat more viable market strategy for their headset, but it’s clearly not a consumer device.
NextFaithlessness7 t1_iz00jpx wrote
You got something in your mouth
DarthBuzzard t1_iyyek39 wrote
> sell twice as many
Not this product though. It's rumored to be a very expensive device.
theo2112 t1_iyyi1k3 wrote
The first iPhone was (I believe) $600 with no subsidy available when paying even $1 for a cell phone was unheard of.
The first iPod (the very first) was expensive relative to other mp3 players.
Again, by Apples playbook you don’t have to be cheap if your product is the best. And, again based on past products, having the first gen be somewhat unattainable for the average person only fuels the demand when gen 2 rolls around at a lower price.
LawsMan t1_iyyo8i5 wrote
The iPhone started at $499 (over $700 today) and required a two year service contract with AT&T. That was a lot of money then too. You’re right that it’s the iterations that bring costs down and expand markets.
People doubting Apple sound a lot like Balmer and the head of Palm:
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” —Palm CEO Ed Colligan, November 16, 2006
DarthBuzzard t1_iyyjmmp wrote
We're talking a possible $2000-3000 device here.
Balducci30 t1_iyyaavz wrote
Weren’t the big ones all Steve Jobs tho conceptually?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments