Will people really buy $3500+tax Apple Vision Pro? I am not talking about handful of Apple die-hard fanatics or influencers, so please reply sensibly. Can this price point justifies directly or indirectly on the value it provides? Can it be sustainable? I saw Apple commercial on it and product seems promising on great experience but still $3500!! Here to have civic discussion and learn from community experience and knowledge. Thanks! TC: 220K
Like this comment if you agree, Apple's Vision Pro has same/similar fate to Meta's Ray-Ban Glasses
Disagree, posting same comment I just made somewhere else. Apple’s head set is appealing because it meets millions of people where they are at, in an Apple ecosystem system. No one wants to be in Meta’s Metaverse. As for the price, the “Pro” suffix implies a non-pro version is coming.
Partially agree to your sentiments, I think meta's glasses died because they tried to solve a problem that didn't exist at all. Not exactly the case with vision pro but their ridiculous price could be an utter disappointment for Apple community (not talking about apple fanatics).
Scanned your post and had to do a double take, thought you had called out that with $3,500 you could buy a Honda Civic. I'll take the car.
Charmed by your sarcasm and wittiness! A+
Probably not. The name Apple Vision PRO emphasizes that they expect this product to be fairly niche. This iteration is an experiment, they’ll take what works well and the next cycle “plebeian version” will focus on improving the strong points while cutting the fat. That’s the hope of course. Full disclaimer, I am not involved in the product at all.
Good point. Product seems promising but to boost adoption it must be affordable. Means, lower the price means, either cutoff features/specs from hardware to reduce COGS, or lower profit margin or sell less and be VERY niche product. Today's apple devices mostly thrive from it's walled garden platform effect, not just a niche product. Market competitors are fairly good options and sometimes better than Apple too. Thoughts?
The timescale is longer than a single product cycle. To use an analogy, it’s a similar strategy to Tesla Model S releasing as a premium positioned product before the mass production model 3. The same point you’re making was also made about Tesla pre model 3. Consider further that Apple’s walled garden has grown significantly in the last decade. I think a lot of the early success of the platform depends on leveraging tech already in the ecosystem. For example, the 3D image viewing is interesting, I wouldn’t be surprised if an iPhone capable of shooting 3D video/photos ends up happening soon. This is the kind of vertical integration Apple thrives on. Apple can afford to let this play out for a few product cycles, as their revenue from iPhone is still growing and there is less pressure for immediate adoption. Companies with less diverse revenue streams (Meta) cannot afford to be patient and need adoption NOW.
I humbly disagree with that rationale. What's the point of having multi tier pricing with different product form factor. From operations management and supply chain perspective, having multiple hardware models would be a bad choice to manage hardware/software integration and further integrating with all other devices within Apple's walled garden. It drastically adds more complexity. In case phones, it's wayyyyy larger consumer base compared to a specific power hungry, non-mobile, comparatively less/lower active operating time device like VIsion Pro. Thoughts?
Your logic has good merits, though I'm pretty skeptical on sustainability. Let's see.. Thanks for sharing!
Have you ever met any apple fanboys. They are iDiots who will sell their kidney to buy a subpar phone and then get the next one with lesser features and more cost for no reason. Let the company fleece these morons and make money. I'll only buy apple stocks 🤑🤑
You are missing the point. All observations are right but uni-directional. No product can thrive purely based on fan boys. I'm nearly 100% sure that Apple didn't make it for 5% filthy rich people, or else it won't be sustainable in near future, and if that's the goal from Apple then it will be a feature in the product portfolio and not a cash cow for Apple. In that case, Apple should mark up price to 10-20K, some idiots will still buy it but product won't grow that way. Sure Apple mostly offers premium experience but never settles or scores for 5% audience, in my observation. As I mentioned in the post, die-hard will buy it no matter what. If Apple focuses on very niche/tiny market segment, then their investors will be pissed off. Investors are there to see growth, not just top tier product. My 2 cents!
@Apple, you are driven by emotions now, so I am out...
Mobile phones were never even remotely close to the price ridiculousness of vision pro. Yet, mobile phones added lot of value in many many ways in daily usage. How do you retain product engagement with this price point?!
The first Motorola phone in 1973 cost $4,000. In 1992 the IBM Thinkpad cost $2,375, or well over $4000 adjusting for inflation.
Definitely yes if you can afford, why not? This product will “mark” an era.
No USB C…
+1
Wait, there is one more thing...external power bank to mount on your chest by Apple for just $1999...oh and if that power bank heats up too much, here is a fan for just $1499... and on and on and on....
Aa obsessed with "prestige" as most of Blind is, I'd imagine we are Apple's target audience.
Preordered, ready for next level pornovision 🍑
Post your receipt here or it didn't happen and this is another troll comment. Apple may block it from it's walled garden ecosystem or charge premium for such content and still offers only visual senses/experience. Also, from branding perspective, I don't think Apple will open floodgate for adult content, rather block content to avoid being it an adult toy branding.
Preorders not open yet