• ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    As always, Apple waited until the tech matured and tried doing it the right way. It wasn’t innovative but it was the best thing you can make at a price consumes can still afford.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      You think consumers can afford an Apple headset? I’d argue one of the reasons it failed is that it was completely unaffordable.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        It was on the verge of affordability. Definitely not something average consumer would buy but achievable for the upper-middle class. I was also aimed at professionals and if a device can you help do your work faster it’s a great investment. The problem was it didn’t let people work faster because despite all the tech it still sucked.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I think it was way over the verge, in fact, a few verges over in another verge entirely.

          If a device can help you do your work faster it might be a great investment based on how much faster it can help you do your work. For a $3500 USD investment, the Apple AR headset would have had to make you massively more productive to justify that up-front cost, or it would have to be something you could expect to last for decades while you paid off that up-front cost with increased productivity.