this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
69 points (87.9% liked)

Technology

57448 readers
4574 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Apple is not exactly downgrading the cheaper Vision Pros but there will be massive changes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] simple@lemm.ee 40 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Apple will reportedly ditch the outside screen to make it more affordable for interested buyers, and instead of the $3,500 price, it would set it at around $1,500 to $2,000.

That's still way too expensive for what it offers.

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Valid point, but have you considered "Apple"?

Sure, it still won't have genuine utility for everyday use, but it will have a rabid fandom who want to be cool to the point of justifying overpriced hardware with weak arguments that reduce to "because I just lile Apple."

[–] simple@lemm.ee 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

People said the same thing when the original Vision Pro came out. Aside from some rich people flexing that they own one, I haven't heard anything about it after one week of release.

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Sounds like a successful product launch, good enough to justify a second product in the line.

The rich flexing inspires desire. People don't want a Lamborghini because it is the best car, they want a Lamborghini because they envy people who have one.

[–] Mbourgon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Go do the demo. It is honestly really impressive. Had no intention of doing it, I’m not the target demographic or audience, but I was there to get a battery replaced and while I waited they did it. My jaw dropped at least twice.

I’m at a loss for the kind of things it can do for me day-to-day right now (and yeah, they have to come up with good selling points there), but for a virtual desktop I’d be there if it were cheaper. But you kinda see where they’re heading - glasses where you could read the web, check weather, watch tv, or play games, the UI, and the phone is just a computing brick that sits in your pocket all day

[–] db2@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't want a Lamborghini, what does that mean?

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Your calves are defined and your bank account can barely hold a comma?

[–] db2@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago
[–] Wanderer@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's Apple.

Plenty if people will pay that and think it's an amazing deal for cutting edge, futuristic, elegant technology that no other company is providing.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee -1 points 1 month ago

You mean buying the only actually functional ARM-based laptop built with a level of quality and support that I can expect to continue working with a bloat-free UNIX-based OS for the next decade before I switch it to Linux for probably a decade more? And it starts at $1,100?

What are those people thinking? It's not even Copilot+ ready! /s

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Am I remembering right that it is proprietary battery cable shit and doesn't cooperate with anything but macOS? That will be a hard no from me even if they get it down in the hundreds.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 4 points 1 month ago

It’s a marketing trick. First suggest an insanely high price. Customer rejects. Then suggest a lower price, but still expensive. The customer will be more inclined to buy, because the new lower price feels like a good deal in relation to the incredibly expensive old price.

If they went with the lower price right away, the customer wouldn’t be as inclined to buy because they don’t have the incredibly insane price as a reference point.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Maybe, but it’s close to the price of their other electronics, while still be pingble to claim it’s a premium product compared to other consumer goggles

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Right, just checked their website and a maxed 15 pro max is 1600$ lol that's a lot for what you get