Hacker News Reader

Comment by lnrd | Hacker News Reader

Because this is a first iteration specifically made for developer to start to get their app running, so that when the consumer less expensive model will be released a couple of years down the line there's already an app ecosystem ready.

It's a strategic release aimed at devs and early adopters, the consumer level device will come in the future at a complete different price point. That's when mass customer adoption might happen.

Also Meta is struggling also because their device is a novelty without many great software. See a pattern?

View on HN

"so that when the consumer less expensive model will be released a couple of years down the line there's already an app ecosystem ready."

....

You think that developers are going to create a thriving ecosystem of apps when there's no market until several years down the line? Bit of a Chicken or the egg problem isn't it?

Tens of hundreds of Innovator-category developers will build surprising, delightful apps for the hundreds of thousands of Innovator-category Vision Pro first-year buyers.

Early-Adopter-category developers and buyers will wait to see what the Innovators discover.

Did they say thriving? They will be the initial foray. There will be enough of a market for early creators (like Apple TV which had small numbers) but reduced competition. The early creators will have some return, reputation and experience to carry through for when the audience grows.

It won't be the opening of floodgates, but I think it will be interesting enough.

A well established dynamic in business is the “flywheel” or “virtuous cycle”. Yes, there is a chicken and egg problem here. That doesn’t in any way make it impossible to get the flywheel going. You just need to invest time, money, and energy to support/subsidize each part of the cycle.

The hardware is probably being sold near to cost, thus speeding up that side of the adoption cycle. And courting developers will allow them to build up the app ecosystem.

Just saying, Microsoft already tried this with the HoloLens, and pivoted hard and fast into B2B only.

As a developer who's worked with the HoloLens, it's not very good & is extremely underwhelming. The tech is cool but the viewport is so small and the hand tracking is extremely tiring. It could never work as a consumer product in it's current state.

The Vision Pro seems to be more focused on the end user experience, so hopefully that will help Apple get their foot in the door with consumers. However, I've never used it so I cant say for sure. The company I work at will most definitely be purchasing them as soon as we can though, very excited to either be extremely underwhelmed or extremely impressed.

Microsoft’s ability to execute at anything hardware other than Xbox is very questionable.

I don’t even know if it is ability, rather than unwillingness to invest the billions of dollars and 10+ years it would take to get something like this off the ground.

I agree with this.

Meta's attempts are currently limited because the sticky use cases seem to be fitness and a little bit of gaming. When you have a device that is viable for some level of work, it's a somewhat easier sell. Apple will be testing this for work (and hybrid remote work) with staff and will have a strong idea as to how viable this is going forward.

Except people have been crowing about using VR headsets for work for years now too and it still hasn’t taken off. This is one of those areas where I think techies are just totally out of touch with what the market wants.

The comments I've mostly seen are people saying that when the pixel density gets there, they'll jump on it or at least be very keen to try it. It hadn't taken off because we've been yet to reach that point. 2024 could be where it starts.

I think the incentive is there for employers to favour these (fit more staff in physical offices; and suits remote work well) and that will push it into the general white collar world.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com