Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
Oohhh exiting 3D!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney, VR/AR, and Apple's WWDC 2023
- Thread starter lentesta
- Start date
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I was pretty down on this being a successful product in the near term, but even I'm surprised how much of a bust this has been thus far. My understanding is that they're apparently going to sell fewer than half of what they projected and it's made essentially no in-roads among the general public.
No
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
Hmmm…
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
…just…shocking
A bit of context. They have enough inventory to carry them through until the next version is released. This is standard manufacturing process.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Yes and no.
This is true, but it's also misleading -- the reason they have enough inventory is because the sales figures are dramatically below projections. They did not originally plan to stop production this early.
Last edited:
Fido Chuckwagon
Well-Known Member
Who could possibly have seen this coming?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
But even successful product lines have been in that position. You can still get a new 9th generation iPad, with a nice discount, six months after Apple stopped selling it directly. They are not being manufactured, have not been in at least several months, but there is still inventory out there and available.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Sure, but that's not the case in this specific instance. We know that demand is far lower than Apple expected.
It feels like spin to hand wave it away as standard manufacturing process. This product line has not been successful (at least compared to Apple's expectations).
Fido Chuckwagon
Well-Known Member
This is never going to be more than a niche product. There are certainly some innovations once mocked that became ubiquitous (smart phones, tablets, video calls, etc). However, the writing is on the wall for a device that requires a person to wear a headset over their eyes. It’s just not a comfortable experience that’s ever going to be widely adopted for the same reason that 3d television and 3d movies never took off despite repeated attempts to make them take off. It also can’t be ignored that there is significant evidence that extended use is really bad for people whose eyes are still developing (basically everyone under the age of 18).
britain
Well-Known Member
I’m sure Apple is disappointed with the numbers, but they knew this was not going to be “the next iPhone” …not yet. Just like Meta and their Orion glasses, Apple knows that really slim and powerful VR/AR glasses aren’t going to be good enough and light enough to take the world by storm until the 2030’s.
However, Apple chose to make some money off of the best thing currently possible, let its visionOS get established, and get its Vision App Store rolling. Why do your R&D in private when you can be making some money off of the prototypes (as long as they actually work of course)?
However, Apple chose to make some money off of the best thing currently possible, let its visionOS get established, and get its Vision App Store rolling. Why do your R&D in private when you can be making some money off of the prototypes (as long as they actually work of course)?
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Ummmm…nobody’s buying the damn thing
So we have to run interference for Bob Iger through failures…does that now extend to Tim Cook because they play shuffleboard together?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
It’s not really all that different. A variety of discontinued iPads are still available new and unopened because demand was lower than expected. That’s the only way that happens.
Just in general the iPad is a story of a niche device that hasn’t really changed anything the way Apple has pushed/hoped. Yes, more have been sold than the VisionPro but very very few expected the expensive VisionPro to do gangbusters business out of the gate. There’s an episode in the first season of Modern Family about Phil wanting an iPad. It’s dweeby Phil who wants the just introduced device that was mocked for sounding like a feminine hygiene product because it wasn’t seen as something with mass appeal like the iPod (which itself went through several versions before becoming a widely known product), it was a weird nerd thing. The iPad 2 ended up really hitting but the line as a whole has never really done what Apple wanted. Sales have been (yes, higher than the VisionPro) but a bit stagnant and flagging for years now. They keep introducing new features, versions and gimmicks to try and kick things up but it’s not really working. People buy them but they’re used as media consumption devices that they use occasionally and hold onto for years. For most people the answer to which one to buy is the cheapest one. The iPad mini was just refreshed with what is being described as a leftover parts model, using processors that apparently didn’t make the cut for use in iPhones, because the demand isn’t really there but they’ve also apparently found a niche with pilots. Beyond the iPad there really isn’t much of a tablet market.
The AppleWatch 10 is shipping with watchOS 11 because Apple had to completely revamp the software in order to finally figure out a device that has some appeal.
A product doesn’t need to iPhone numbers in order to be a worthwhile endeavor. It can be something that people buy once, use from time to time and hold onto years. The VisionPro wasn’t a make or break product that Apple bet the whole farm on. They still rake in billions while sitting on a massive pile of billions. They can at times be stupidly stubborn (see the last years of the x86 laptops) but also a willingness to play a long game and try different approaches.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I think I misunderstood your original post -- I thought you were arguing that the Vision Pro was actually incredibly successful and stopping production was meaningless.
I agree with basically all of this. I'm pretty sure I even compared VR headsets to iPads somewhere earlier in this thread, as a device that will be relatively successful but unlikely to ever become an everyday use device for the general public. That doesn't mean they shouldn't produce them, though.
iPads have definitely been more successful than the Vision Pro, but the Vision Pro also cost 3x as much, so that's not exactly a one to one comparison.
Rich Brownn
Well-Known Member
The other reason 3D never took off was competing systems. While passive glasses could be interchanged with other passive systems, active glasses could not be moved between manufacturers. Having multiple standards just confused everyone.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
This is true, but if they saw a big enough market they'd have worked these issues out (i.e. agreed on a uniform standard). I think the fact that they didn't think it was worth doing tells you all you need to know.
