Hacker News Reader

Comment by hydroxideOH- | Hacker News Reader

Are there a lot of people who live alone in a small apartment that are willing and able to buy a $3500 headset?

I feel like this entire thread has a blind spot to the fact that this device is very much a luxury item. A 55-inch TV is ~$300. A high-end laptop is ~$1000. High-end noise-cancelling headphones are ~$250. You could buy all of those and still not reach half of the cost of this device.

The only people I can see buying the device are rich people looking for another toy, not as a serious competitor to other entertainment tech.

View on HN

>The only people I can see buying the device are rich people looking for another toy, not as a serious competitor to other entertainment tech.

I'm surprised at how consistently people think that a technology that is so expensive and serving such a niche will end up having adoption asides from a few wealthy enthusiasts. iPhone 2 suggested retail price was $300 (~$425 in todays dollars) and provided "smart" replacement for your cell phone matching its features 1-to-1 while also providing more than what was available.

If someone imagines themselves buying this to watch movies "on the go" or at hotels or something, they're part of an extremely exclusive club.

It's 10x the cost of an entry Oculus device. And no one wants that either.

Meta Quest's are basically video game devices. It's a much different market than AVP.

Meta is selling hundreds of thousands of units a month, so I don't know if I'd say no one wants it either. It seems to be selling pretty well overall, but Meta way overinvested in some of the stuff and is having a hard time making enough money.

They're both primarily for media consumption.

Just because one device is from Apple doesn't make media consumption any more virtuous or productive.

The Quest 2 has sold 5-10x as many units as the first iphone did. Apples to oranges, but that's not no one.

> iPhone 2 suggested retail price was $300 (~$425 in todays dollars)

This was back when most phones were still carrier subsidized and required long term service contracts. Per Apple's press release, the $299 pricing required "a new two year contract with AT&T". Unsubsidized price was about double.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2008/06/09Apple-Introduces-th...

> $3500 headset?

Nobody is buying the Pro version of the headset just for watching movies other than the early adopters, YouTubers etc we have today.

The idea is that when a normal version launches for $999 it will be a far more compelling proposition.

Sure, there are in any of the global cities. I'm in the DC area, so I know plenty of people who have money and live in apartments/condos. NYC is the same way. There are plenty of people in the Bay Area that this describes as well. And then you talk about Western Europe and Asia, and home theater setups are a lot less common.

Even if you have a lot of space in your apartment, it's hard to justify much of a home theater setup, as you will be really limited by sound issues.

The price will come down. This version is for wealthy early adopters.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com