[textadventure]

Isn't that the kind of description of the first iteration of many innovative products? The iPad was mocked just as much if not more, it was a big iphone without the phone, with no possibility of multitasking and a plethora of other limitations and yet now tablets are ubiquitous.

It's not hard to see how this product could continue to be streamlined and made more accessible in the future.

edit: typos, clarity

[stouset]

Apple showing up to the party is usually a pretty good indicator of a technology having crossed a maturity threshold: smartphones, tablets, smart watches, wireless earbuds, TV streaming devices, ARM laptops, etc.

Even their “misses” have just been devices that were too niche or bad value propositions for the average consumer, rather than being technically immature (thinking of HomePod here). It’s rare for Apple to launch a device that’s just far too early to be useful even to its target audience.

[jsheard]

It's not really the first iteration though, the modern VR era started about 8 years ago with the first consumer Oculus Rift and in that time it's been iterated on numerous times by numerous players and none of them have stuck.

[lapcat]

iPad sold 300k units on the first day: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2010/04/05Apple-Sells-Over-30...

[textadventure]

The iPad was $500 when it launched, vs $3500 for the Apple Vision Pro.

[lapcat]

Yes, but what's your point?

"The iPad was mocked" is irrelevant. Many or most products are mocked by some people, even iPhone. Regardless of mocking, iPad was an immediate success. Vision Pro is not. I fully admit that the price of Vision Pro is the biggest problem. But you can't pretend that the first iteration of Vision Pro is just like the first iteration of iPad.

[textadventure]

My point is that they are two very different products with substantially different target audiences.

Now, sure, you can say the Vision Pro was not as big a success as the iPad even if you account for that difference in markets, scale, price ranges, etc. But that doesn't mean it's a total failure either, or that there is no future for the product.

Most people who have a Vision Pro, seem to like it. It's unsurprising that it's not flying off the shelves because at the moment it's little else than an expensive toy, and once the novelty wears off it's not like there is that much to do with it at the moment, it's also seemingly uncomfortable to wear for prolonged periods of time. But like I said, it's not hard to see how it could be getting better with future iterations.

So even if there is no perfect correlation between the shortcomings of the first iPad and the larger shortcomings of the first Vision Pro, there is a correlation.

[johnnyanmac]

putting aside my bitter cynicism of "Apple hype culture": I do think VR just needs to wait for the tech to evolve into the level of ease of "put on snow goggles" before we get wide adoption. But I also am in the camp where I don't see this being a market with desperate demand. The iPad is a great example because in many ways it's the same: some people read religiously on it, other people are artists and they catered to that market. Then others just use it as a "cheap" computer to put in front of a kid.

These are diverse markets, but far from the general market. I think VR/AR will end up the same.

[lapcat]

> These are diverse markets, but far from the general market.

What do you mean by the general market?

iPad has more unit sales than Mac. It's a massive market. The last time Apple reported unit sales, back in 2018, iPad was selling over 43 million units per year.

[lapcat]

> there is a correlation.

I don't see it.

[epolanski]

> Isn't that the kind of description of the first iteration of many innovative products?

VR headsets are at their 6th or 7th iteration in the last decade.

[eviks]

Obviously not a universal desription since these issues are not universal, plenty of innovative products without such big issues

[dylan604]

tablets are everywhere, can be shared, and do not make people look ridiculous. hell, even my cats have apps made just for them. haven't seen any viral videos of pets wearing a headset.

not being able to see how this is different is very disingenuous. when the ipad was released, nobody had a device like that. apple's headset was not the first. even those the came before did not gain a lot of traction. so apple is not blazing new trails here that people just don't understand yet. this is an accepted as niche product line for certain personalities.

[textadventure]

> tablets are everywhere

They are now, and that's exactly the point. And people don't look ridiculous now because they became adopted, but even the first versions of mobile phones made people look ridiculous.

Have some perspective, try to think beyond a lapse of more than two years back and forwards.

[ulfw]

My 70+ year old aunt and 75year old mom (at the time) were using the very first (heavy and clunky) iPad. It was a device that immediately appealed to certain people for who full on computing was too much, when all they wanted to do was reading newspapers, websites, watching photos.

I cannot see this with a VR headset. It's a very geeky limited market, no matter the price point. But ESPECIALLY at Apple's price point.

[hackeraccount]

They laughed at the iPhone.

They laughed at the iPad.

However they also laughed at the Newton.

[fwip]

No. The iPad was mocked by tech bros who saw "Worse computer."

Pretty much anyone who had used an iPhone or iPod touch was like, "Oh hell yeah, big iPhone."

Pointing out that the device sucks to actually use in important physical and social ways is the opposite.

[HKH2]

How is it innovative?

[textadventure]

Well, for one thing being able to interface with it by simply gesturing with your hands, seems pretty unique.

[CharlieDigital]

    > being to able to interface with it by simply gesturing with your hands

You mean kinda like how I can move my finger a few centimeters to interface with a complex, multi-windowed computer desktop?

[textadventure]

You know perfectly well that you can't use any computer without touching a controller of some kind.

[defrost]

That seems improbable and a challenge for many here.

eg: Theremoose - the Theremin Controlled Computer Mouse https://www.instructables.com/Theremoose-the-Theremin-Contro...

In the disability domain voice operations have a history.

[textadventure]

It's clear that we are talking about consumer products, typical use cases, etc.

[johnnyanmac]

Reminds me of the Magic Leap. Or even the Kinect. That use case is even more niche than VR, but setup some tracking gloves and you can perform gesture based actions on your PC (don't really NEED the gloves, but it improves precision without needing a special spatial comera).

Crude, but it's technically possible.

[pjmlp]

Do I?

"The Xbox Kinect: Your Body is the Controller"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TICbjFtnmk

[jachee]

The connection to the real world from inside is incredible. You can forget you’re not looking through heavy googles but rather at a screen.

[crooked-v]

The UX itself is an iPhone-vs-Blackberry style leap compared to every other AR or VR device out there. It's just a fundamentally better paradigm for basic tasks and for mixing a headset (or future iGlasses) with non-VR activities.