You’re patently wrong, have you even used passthrough on other headsets? Apple as usually loves to market things as if they’re the first to do it, but like usual they’re just iterating on what others have done (and to be fair, usually doing a good job of polishing it up), but to say that passthrough on other headsets can’t be used for “literally anything that isn’t very slowly repositioning yourself in a room” is wildly wildly false. Other headsets do this pretty competently.
I totally agree that relying on in-headset processing and not being able to hook up to a computer is a massive mistake for any headset and will relegate them to being stuttery paper weights in a shorter time than you’d think (look at the processors in “smart” TV’s for a similar situation to reference.)
Yeah 100% I’m not for a moment knocking the hardware, it is genuinely impressive stuff and will pretty much be industry leading when it releases, most of my confusion comes from where it stands as a saleable product.
That would be a bigger market, IF non-gamers had interest in VR. You make fair points, but I really really don’t see the average person putting on a VR headset to consume content, even at a lower price. The “weirdness” alot of people who aren’t in the tech or gaming space about buying/using a VR headset I think is a huge hurdle for Apple with a product like this.
Apple is alot of things I don’t like, but stupid (from a profit/business standpoint) isn’t one. Apple sell alot of products that I think are hot garbage and would be embarrassed to own, but they’re not for me as a consumer, and they tend to sell a bazillion of whatever it is and make a ton of money.
Even trying to put my biases aside though, I cannot fathom what their gameplan with this is though. Even if it was a good deal and great product, a pretty huge proportion of VR headset purchasers are PC gamers, and that generally isn’t a demographic that is Apple leaning. So the buyer for this is a person who uses VR regularly (probably a PC gamer), but also someone who is Apple leaning enough to get this vs. an Index or Vive, who also is willing to pay an A.B.S.U.R.D price premium for it (it is pretty impressive hardware to be fair, but not 3-4 times the cost impressive).
My guess is that they’re intentionally taking a loss on this, putting it out as a halo product that gets talked about a ton (that’s already happening because of the price, like they did with the mac pro wheels), and generally get a ton of attention on this without selling many (but just enough to get user data and hardware information to iterate on) and THEN in a suitable amount of time they’ll release one that will genuinely be competitive, at a big price drop, and sell a ton.
People far too often argue “Communism/Socialism/Capitalism/etc. is the best economic system, because blah blah blah”. Anyone that has played Civilization and has half a brain cell can tell you that there is no single best economic system, as it’s so heavily dependent on the structure of a country, current levels of development, and many other factors.
I have always said, that capitalism is very probably the best economic system for rapidly developing countries in a state of industrialization (there was obvious horrific cons to this, but the complexity of discussing the use of slavery, child labour, land repossession, genocide, etc., is a conversation beyond the scope of this simple remark on economics. Consider the dominance of France, Britain, and Spain in 1800 and compare it to the juggernaut that the US became in the next 100 years by 1900, and the benefits of relatively unfettered capitalism during industrializing periods, should be readily apparent given that colossal level of growth from a sparsely populated and undeveloped country in it’s infancy in the late 1700s-early 1800s) and is probably the best economic system for this, BUUUUUUT commensurate with the level of automation, and computerized work roles within a society, a more and more heavily socialized economic system makes sense to stymie the accumulation and sole ownership of the automated systems by the wealthy few who profit off of it, while job opportunities dwindle for the rest.
The world needs to socialize more heavily, and fast, the US is in a particularly precarious spot. The number 1 job in nearly every state is truck driver, and there are already autonomous trucks on the road today. Between AI, and autonomous vehicles, we will see what happened to jobs in the automotive sector from 1950-2000, in industries like taxis, truck driving, coding, graphic design, journalism, and much much MUCH more in the next 50 years, and the US is not ready for it’s job market to do country wide, what happened in Detroit. The wealthy owners of these automated machines, and AI systems filling these job roles will become richer off of them, while the rest of the country struggles. Heavy socialization, alongside reduced work weeks and either subsequent massive increases in minimum wages, or guaranteed basic income will be a necessity for coming generations to not exist in poverty.
Thanks neighbor! I hope you have a wonderful day.
The degree to which you’re wrong is truly astonishing.
Agreed, when I said “intentionally taking a loss” that was referring to the short term. In the long term, like you said they’re fairly likely to build this into a large lucrative platform. Great comment, you’ve made excellent points throughout, thanks for the good discourse :)