Comment by tempnow987
3 years ago
Techcrunch concluded "The price reveal turned any ‘would buy’ in the room into a ‘definitely not’ without hesitation."
Anyways, bookmark the threads of folks calling an Apple product dead on arrival for a revisit in a few years.
The ipod, the iphone, the watch, the airpods... they've had a pretty good record and almost all these have had harsh criticism out the gate (while then going on to absolutely PRINT money for apple).
Apple is sitting on lots of cash and investment with operating cash flow of something like another $100B a year? Why aren't they allowed to take some risks on products like this. Facebook certainly has burnt billions in a similar space.
I remember hardly any significant negative criticism of the iphone, watch, or airpods.
Someone below brought up "when the iphone first came out it was 2G, was only on AT&T" - well, yeah, and those were very valid initial shortcomings that Apple pretty quickly rectified.
With the Vision Pro, I see very few comments putting down the actual technological achievements here. Comments seem to be pretty universal in thinking this is the best VR device there is. But the valid question is people are still having a difficult time imagining real, extended use cases where it doesn't feel like a novelty.
Personally, I think it's great Apple took a swing at this. I wouldn't be willing to bet one way or the other on its success, I think there are lots of unknowns, but I don't really have anything but high praise for the folks that built this.
Watch was criticized for its poor battery life and lack of usage other than health/training management. Now battery life is improved a bit and more health features added, but I think the OG criticize point is still valid. Why is it sold well is that it seems that many people care about health device than we expected.
Also the watch launched with a bunch of expensive ultra-luxury options that were mocked. Ive tried to lean heavily into fashion which was quickly dropped in later revisions.
1 reply →
Apple Watch also isn't really the game changer that something like the iPod or iPhone (or various Macs throughout the years) was. Sure I see people wearing them, but not a tremendous amount, and not completely out of line with something like a FitBit or a Garmin.
Apple created a very competitive product in an established market with the Watch, they didn't change the game.
Which is where I could see the Apple Vision Pro ending up, but I'm sure that's well short of Apple's expectations.
AirPods were called 'q-tips in your ears' from people who thought they looked stupid but that faded pretty quickly once the utility became clear
well there was that time [0] Rudy Giuliani wore them like a space-alien, that was kind of funny.
[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rudy+guiliani+air+pods&ia=images&i...
The iPhone wowed everyone but its price was heavily criticized. Apple later got into the exclusive AT&T deal which "subsidized" the price. People just ended up paying more over time.
IPhone didn't have a pen. It didn't run symbian as it's OS. This is what I remember people complaining about.
4 replies →
> I remember hardly any significant negative criticism of the iphone, watch, or airpods.
Sounds like you have a memory problem. I’m sure you can find the threads archived if you need reminded of the criticisms.
Criticism of the iPhone on it's debut was absolutely vicious.
Criticism of the iPad was even worse.
I just want to point out: At the time of the iPhone launch, AT&T's business model (and every other telecom up until this tipping point) was to sell "minutes" which was essentially micro-charges for consumers who want to make calls or send texts.
This was mostly an infrastructure problem that Apple innovated on and helped AT&T solve- carriers would no longer need to sell "minutes" but could instead sell Data, which was a much better value proposition. There's a quote in the movie Blackberry along the lines of "the problem with selling minutes is that there's only 60 of them in a minute to sell".
I can only assume this attributed to the global adoption of the "data sale" model (and the iPhone with it) since the profit ceiling was exponentially higher for every carrier.
This is 100% wrong. The original iPhone plan from AT&T included unlimited data but was still capped on minutes: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2007/06/26AT-T-and-Apple-Anno...
Data plans existed before the iPhone. And Europe was much more hardcore with minutes than the states at that time (I remember that ATT standard plans were not unlimited talk at that point, something that was unheard of in Switzerland where I was living in 2007). In fact, I think the innovation was something like unlimited data?
I've never spent more than $400 for a smartphone, always bought second hand Android phones. My income went up in the last couple of years and a few months ago my phone broke. I bought a $900 iPhone.
If it's good people will buy it. I will buy it. No doubt about that.
I've tried $100 phones from the Walmarts, and I've tried the top of the line Pixel phone a few years ago. Nothing comes close to a iOS or iPhones.
I just wish they made a printer. I'd buy an Apply printer in a heartbeat, I don't care what it costs.
Hear Hear! A printer and a WiFi AP!
1 reply →
Good old days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaserWriter
1 reply →
People paid $550 for a pair of headphones. They'll buy this if it's good
to be fair, $550 for a pair of headphones is a lot, but it's not even close to top of the range
It was definitely in the upper range of prices for over-the-ear Bluetooth headphones, not like this even matters, because people just _did not_ pay $500+ for headphones before the Maxes dropped.
9 replies →
> $550 for a pair of headphones is a lot, but it's not even close to top of the range
It's top of the range for typical consumers. The people who wear Apple's $550 headphones aren't people who are buying Sennheiser HD800s'. Before, people would've spent $200 or up to $300 on the Bose ones. Apple got them to spend an extra $200-250.
I'm surprised by how often I see these headphones. They were basically nonexistent in the Bay Area but I see them often enough in NYC.
People were paying similar amounts for high-end headphones for years.
Not the same people though
Except no one bought those headphones.
Not true, I bought them and really dislike them.
2 replies →
You'd be surprised how popular they are. Certainly they're overpriced, but the noise cancellation/sound/build quality/etc is very good. They've also apparently become something of a celebrity "it" item: https://www.vogue.com/article/are-the-airpods-max-the-latest...
I see these people in the gym with all the time with them. I think your “no one’s buying them” might be rooted in a personal bias.
I personally love those headphones even despite their price.
I love mine and would rebuy them without blinking.
6 replies →
[flagged]
8 replies →
Whether or not it's the right device, it's definitely being introduced to the wrong economy.
iPhone 3G was released in summer 2008, right in the middle of the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. Arguably, this was the beginning of iPhone's rise in popularity. The original iPhone was released in 2007, and the cracks in the economy were beginning to show then...
But it cost $500 ($700 in today's dollars) and the day-to-day utility of cellphones/blackberries had already been established for a decade. Your example doesn't seem that comparable.
4 replies →
The people that can afford this aren’t impacted by the economy. It’s a professional tool and the expense can be justified. It’s not a product for ordinary consumers yet. On top of that it’s not out until next year - who knows what the economy will be like then.
> It’s a professional tool
That you use to look at family photos, use iPhone apps in a giant window, watch movies, and play with VR Mickey Mouse? The presentation seemed to lean more towards the consumer than industry applications.
4 replies →
Yes, I feel a lot of people are too tied down to their biases and social bubbles. I'm working in the area and you see great use of these devices from medical, to architecture, and mechanical engineering.
I understand the skepticism, but sometimes our perception of the world is quite narrow. Given that most of us are developers, even more so.
I don't mean to be condescending, I just feel that way a lot with both myself and my colleagues when exposed to fields and constraints that we haven't seen before.
It is the first version of the Vision Pro and I would expect it to fail due to its price.
The second or third version maybe something worthy of the consumer having a look at. This is directly competing against the Quest Pro, and the Vision Pro is still at prices like the HoloLens.
Apple will probably announce a 'Lite' version which will directly compete against Meta's cheaper Quest VR headsets.
> Facebook certainly has burnt billions in a similar space.
And their Quest VR headsets already outsold Xbox Series X/S. [0]
[0] https://www.thevirtualreport.biz/data-and-research/65297/que...
How do you define failure? I reckon that if people start to make apps for this device, then it’s served its purpose. The next generation, or “lite” version will arrive to an already-populated ecosystem. Meanwhile Apple will have a lot of data about what worked and what didn’t to tweak their direction.
> The ipod, the iphone, the watch, the airpods... they've had a pretty good record and almost all these have had harsh criticism out the gate (while then going on to absolutely PRINT money for apple).
Looks like you and me have a completely different memory on this? iPod, iPhone were almost unanimously praised at the moment of announcement, thanks to Steve's magic. AirPod also received generally positive reactions. Apple Watch had a genuine issue on its product positioning and its success came after fixing that issue.
The reaction to the iPod that everyone remembers was "No wireless, less space than a Nomad, lame", never mind the criticism of an apple only device, or the cost (honestly, the mac mini and maybe the m1 airs are the only two devices I can think of apple has released that people didn't complain about the price).
The iPhone in addition to pricing was also widely panned for being 2G only, for being AT&T only, for requiring a data plan, for not having a physical keyboard, for not having a stylus and for being something no one needed because our phones and ipods already do all of that.
The iPhone did get a better reception than the iPod, but that's probably owed to the success of the iPod in proving Apple might just have an idea or two about how to make a new piece of cool tech, but it had plenty of poo-pooing by the tech class too.
> never mind the criticism of an apple only device
The first iPod was predicated on FireWire and iTunes, which were basically only available on Macs at the time.
(iTunes - Jan 2001, iPod - Oct 2001, iTunes Store - Apr 2003, iTunes for Windows - Oct 2003.)
iPad was definitely mocked.