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?

  • borari@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    2 years 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.