Most people don't regularly travel by plane. This is a very "1%" (as shorthand for a privileged minority of people globally, not literally exactly 1% of the population) problem.
https://www.airlines.org/new-survey-nearly-90-percent-of-ame...
44% of Americans flew commercially in 2022.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937802...
Probably not enough to make the statement that flying is a situation people find themselves in regularly.
It’s clear the Vision Pro didn’t find its market but I don’t think it’s an air travel thing.
I just don't see the market Apple envisions materializing. I'd expect 20 people to be using a Quest in economy before you see 2 people using a Vision Pro in business.
If plane seating is anything to go by, most people don't want a luxury experience but a practical and cheap one instead. Most seats aren't reserved for premium passengers because they are a minority, maybe a profitable audience but not at all the primary one.
OG iPhone: $799
iPhone 3G: $199
> They are a luxury brand that relies on luxury margins, so I want to know why their business model will succeed.
Apple has shown many times over they don't need to be price competitive with the commodity segment. If you want to know why their business model will succeed, why not just look at their current business model which has been massively successful? Arguably the most successful business model in the history of consumer hardware.
Same poll can result with statement "100% of Americans use internet."
Some hard data says that 12% of US flyers take 66% of flights [1]. Those are all likely very frequent fliers, and is much more than 1%.
1. https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2021/03/31...
Except, they do in a country like the US that has massive distances between cities.
Statista survey pre-pandemic says majority fly every year https://www.statista.com/statistics/316365/air-travel-freque...
Americans fly quite often.
Last year, the prediction was 4.7 million people in the US traveling by plane over the thanksgiving holiday, which demolishes the 1% comment immediately.
> Except, they do in a country like the US that don't have any other suitable alternatives
I'd love a moderately fast train, say 200kph, between cities like Portland and Seattle. That's a great use case.
But as a nationwide network, there won't ever be a suitable rail alternative, unless it gets subsidized. Amtrak is already stupidly expensive for what you get.