Apple’s Vision Pro Is a $3,500 Ticket to Nowhere

For general productivity, I feel that the laptop and external monitor is the sweet spot for the peak of computing. All other optimizations have given diminishing returns.

For consumption, the mobile phone is the sweet spot.

I put up with a lot of jank and discomfort with my VR headset, because the feeling of Presence is so transformative in gaming, exercise, and entertainment for me. I don't think the majority of people will choose that trade-off on a regular basis, especially in social environments.

And it introduced a number of killer features that were immediately apparent: -GPS for navigation (almost immediately made Tom Toms in cars obsolete) with Google Maps -Pinch to zoom for the pre-responsive mobile web, with full HTML websites on device -Glass touch haptics with gestures: pinch, double tap, swipe up/down/right/left, etc -Unlimited data back when it was unheard of -Unlimited text messaging back when it was rare -Solid camera experience with both front and back facing camera -Complete iPod replacement with built-in iTunes, a killer app at the time with no peer -Visual voicemail -A usable touch screen keyboard, with intuitive multi-touch controls -HTML email -YouTube app built-in -Accelerometer for orientation-based controls -Proximity and ambient light sensors -Apps, apps, apps. Although App Store wasn't immediately ready for 1st gen iPhone, it was apparent that apps were coming and that they would be amazing, with plenty of built-in 1st and 3rd party apps at launch. Every other mobile phone that implemented apps up to that point did so with a ton of red tape and licensing fees

When the iPhone was announced by Jobs in 2007, it was 5 years ahead of any other phone on the market.

The Vision Pro, on the other hand, pitches itself as a $3500 monitor replacement, I guess? It doesn't even have one killer app. You could feel the hype and excitement for the original iPhone on day one.

Maybe Vision Pro will evolve into something killer in the 2nd or 3rd generation offering. But as it stands, I'm not seeing the vision.

I really don't think people need to try the device to form the opinion that a future with people walking around with expensive goggles on their face (recording 3D videos of their kids during birthday parties) isn't really a good one.

The Vision Pro is a direct competitor to the Varjo. Early reports are that it is better. It comes in at half the price and no subscription fees.

The Vario is what some Apple employees used as devkits during the software development phase.

Apple is masterful at bringing the public along slowly with an easy to digest narrative. They don't tell the whole story right up front, because people need the breadcrumbs and onboarding.

> smart phones / camera phones were a valid market

feels revisionist. Something like 70% of Americans had a feature phone in 2007 but smartphone market share was probably in the single digits before the iPhone launched. I had a Palm m100 back in the day; PDAs and early smartphones weren't all that great, and it wasn't obvious to laymen that the hardware and software would scale down enough and be combined with a compelling enough interaction model to create something useful for the masses.

You're right that the iPhone demo had some killer features apparent. Jobs had three tentpoles: better iPod, a phone, a good internet machine. Cook mimicked this for the Watch keynote: a timepiece, a new way to communicate, a health and fitness device. But for the latter, it wasn't apparent just how much the health and fitness stuff would become a part of the story, nor was it apparent that people ended up liking the Watch for keeping their phone out of their hands or being able to accessorize.

I don't think the Vision Pro reveal was as effective, but the tentpoles seem to be immersive media consumption (with movies and photos as a 1a and 1b), monitor replacement, and better FaceTime meetings. The last one seems particularly suspect, but the first two are pretty strong.