Partly that's because you're taking a negative stance, and people who don't care about, or like, the VP, are not searching out videos about it. That means your audience is inherently people who are excited about the product, as it's only people interesting the VP who's going to watch this. History has shown how this will play out many times over, and with that said, it's fine you think it's going to flop, as time will prove you wrong, so that's no sweat off my back. My beef with your video hasn't been with your position it will flop, which is a valid stance; even if its wrong. My beef has been your false characterization that this launch/product is un-Apple-like, and from the comments, it seems that's what most people are complaining about as well. Any student of Apple knows just how quintessentially Apple-like this entire thing is.
I’m not sure there’s a correlation between excitement for the product and someone like me stating it’s not like Apple. I’m beyond excited for it! But I genuinely think this doesn’t fit for apple
@@JerrysTalks Dude, are you serious? I don't care about your excitement, it doesn't matter. You made a video arguing that the Vision Pro is not Apple like, which is just wrong, as everyone has pointed out, I, myself, in great detail. But in the comment you just made you said, you "think it's going to flop." That's a negative sentiment (in addition to your erroneous opinion about how unlike Apple this situation is). You're pitching this bad take about how unlike Apple this is, as well as your negative opinion about the successfulness of the product, to a group of people who are more informed about Apple than your average person, and who are interested in the device, and you don't think that's going to cause backlash? (The only people watching VP videos are Apple fans who are interested in the VP.) You yourself said, "oooof tough crowd is an understatement." And yet you don't see the correlation between excitement for the product (which is what your entire viewership for this video is, "people who are *interested* in watching VP videos") and the backlash your negativity is bringing on? (Erroneous negativity at that.) Maybe you should find something else to do, because you can't see the barn door you just walked face first into. Like the obvious mismatch between your video's audience and your opinion could not be more clear. That means for "some reason" your video is attracting the attention of a lot of people who don't agree with you, that reason is pretty obvious. Because the ONLY reason people are watching this video is because it's about the VP, and you have a bad take that the people specifically watching VP content don't agree with.
Why don't you set an appointment to try it out so you can have an actual valid opinion? I did think iPad was useless when it first came out. Now, it is my go to device for entertainment.
@@JerrysTalks it just makes no sense. This is absolutely an apple like product but I'm sure you trying to find a way to grab attention with your headline
@ointerface lmao did you watch this video? The whole video is about the thesis I stated in the title and why I think it’s the most un-apple like product yet. Nothing insinuated anything else. Clickbait would be me saying “Apple Vision Pro Unboxing” but the video is actually me ranting about the concept of the product. That’s clickbait…….?
its because you've done no research into apple product categories and its painfully obvious. Look at the first Mac, the first Mac laptop, the first iPod, the first iPhone, the first Apple Watch.. literally every first generation product has had these characteristics yet you're judging it against 10th-20th gen products. @@JerrysTalks
Totally don't understand where you're coming from. Everything about this is EXTREMELY Apple like. Just about every Apple product ever launched was half baked. Original Mac, completely useless, and $7.5k after adjusted for inflation. The Apple Lisa was $29k. The iPhone was a pile, and was 10x more expensive that other cell phones people were used to. The original Apple watch had TERRIBLE battery life, was slow, and couldn't run Apps natively, and was crazy expensive. Just like the original iPhone. The iPad was launched without native apps, and had to run upscaled iPhone apps, and was as expensive as an actual Mac! The original Apple Pencil had to be charged by awkwardly dangling off the bottom of the iPad in a very suggestive sort of way. I can keep going. I actually feel the Vision is less half baked than most of Apple's launches. I think people are mostly turned off by the price, because they have grown accustom to Apple launching less technically significant products. However, the Vision has an M2, an R1, and TWO microOLED displays. Each one of these, and especially the displays, are large dies that have to be fabbed at a chip foundry. Imagine what it would cost you if you bought a mac with four processors in it? It would be more than Vision Pro money, but that's the amount of fab work we're talking about here. This is the most envelope pushing product Apple has ever released. Far more effort and R&D, and manufacturing cost, has gone into this than any product Apple has ever done. So yeah, it's expensive. At Apple's sales price, they are probably not make much on this device.
I completely agree with everything you’re saying here. This is a technological marvel of a product. My point is solely on the TYPE of product. The AR/VR market feels more in its infancy than even foldable phones to me. The tech makes for a phenomenal demo, but in practicality, there is nothing intuitive about these big, bulky, headache inducing systems, with seemingly little-to-no consumer market. I think that partly shows in the potential sales numbers, but more specifically here because this product doesn’t really solve anything and it shows by a lack of consumer interest. Yes, that partly has to do with the price, and yes apple has to start somewhere in order to tap into this market, I guess, but this market is to me what feels so un-Apple-like. Hopefully that makes sense.
@@JerrysTalks Apple's entering the space at the exact same time they always do. When the tech is just barely in reach to realize their vision. (No pun intended.) When Apple released the original Mac back in 1984, the hardware was only barely able to run the GUI (which was quite revolutionary back in 1984), and with only 128k of ram, the computer lacked the memory necessary to run any additional software, which was fine i guess, since there wasn't any. It wasn't until Apple updated the Mac the next year with the 512k version, that it actually became useful, not that sales figures were all that high (Apple was still living off of Apple II sales). When Apple came out with iPhone, it was the capacitance multitouch display, which had only just been developed, which enabled Apple to do the device. But backlight tech was still lacking, battery tech was still lacking, cellular modems were still lacking, the camera was hot garbage, the ARM processor they had to use could barely lift the OS, there was no flash, and Apple only barely managed to cobble together a mobile OS, so they couldn't provide third party app support, as the API infrastructure wasn't refined enough. I don't want to take the time to bring you through every historical event, but Apple always launches their products when their goal is just barely within their grasp. The reason is, they want to be an industry leader, so they launch as soon as they can. Now many people say that Apple's innovations are not innovations at all, because there were GUIs before Mac, there were smart phones before iPhone, tablets before iPad, smart watches before Apple Watch, MP3 players before iPod, etc. However, Apple isn't trying to be first to demonstrate what is little more than an a lab proof of concept for the raw technology, they are trying to be the first to show the world the "proper way" to build a "cohesive" solution, and thus they usually are first to build a *successful* product. So they don't launch until the tech is advanced enough for the "proper way" to be visible, but they launch when they can only just manage it, which means, the industry is in its infancy. Of course, that's by design. The PC industry was in it's infancy when they launched the Apple and the Apple II, and the Mac for that matter. Smart phones were in their infancy when they launched iPhone. MP3 players were in their infancy when they launched iPod. Tablets were in their infancy when they launched iPad. Smart watches were in their infancy when they launched Apple Watch. Notebook computers where in their infancy when Apple launched Powerbook. Apple is all about entering immature markets, so that they can force the market to mature in the direction they want it to go. They don't want to be last to the party. Just fashionably late. I'm not sure what you mean there is "nothing intuitive"? You mean there are compromises to the experience? Sure, just like every other launch product. But using your eyes and hands to interact with the device is FAR more "intuitive" than anything anyone else has going on. The weight of the device, the size, has nothing to do with the "intuitiveness." They are just compromises one makes to get the minimum feature set Apple was shooting for, at the present level of technological ability. Nothing new, typical Apple. I'm not sure what you're talking about sales numbers for. Very few of Apple's products sold gang busters day one. Mac sold absolutely terribly, and here we are, celebrating its 40th birthday this month. The sales figures are low because it's a launch product, and it's expensive. So what? That doesn't make it "un-Apple". How long have you been in the Apple ecosystem? Apple is notorious for having expensive products. Give Vision four generations of updates, and then get back to me as to how you think it's doing. Most of Apple's products don't even think about going mainstream until the fourth generation. It wasn't until the iPhone 4 that Apple really cracked the mass market, same for the Apple Watch with Series 4. In fact it took Mac 13 years before it started to go mainstream with the launch of the first iMac (that's like 7 generations). Most of Apple's first gen products don't "solve" anything. The original Apple computer didn't solve anything, the original Mac didn't solve anything, the original iPad didn't solve anything, the original Apple Watch didn't solve anything. Like seriously, I don't understand your position. Sure it's not a fully polished product, that's gone through multiple generations, and has ten years of software written for it. But, like that's NEVER what Apple "launches" with. This is EXACTLY like every other major Apple launch. And I mean EXACTLY. And I've seen most of them first hand. And the ones I haven't, I've studied.
Sorry, I disagree with your opinions. This is absolutely like an Apple product, just in a new category. I have used it several times and can't wait to get mine in a few days.
@@Warp2090considering they were predicted to only be able to make around 1M of those displays in the first year and each unit needs 2 of them, the fact they sold that many already is actually pretty good
Every other product had a defined user it was selling to and had a defined place in the market. Who is the defined user of this product? What is the defined market? What is the primary use case of this? What demographic is this even for? $3499 for a product with no clear user in mind is very hard for average consumers to justify. The tech is the best technology I’ve ever seen it’s truly a marvel, but there is no defined user or use for this thing which is very ambiguous for such an expensive gen1 product.
@@JerrysTalksand that’s what Apple does! They create a new market. People said “there’s no market for this” when the iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch etc. came out. Now look at how fast they’re selling. 😃 Vision Pro will make its own mark. At 180,000 sold units in just a few days, @ $3400, I say it’s a great start. :)
It’s the quintessential Apple product. Whenever this is downsized, it’ll make sense… not an iPhone but an eyePhone eventually Not an Apply fanboy, I’m cool with eyePhones taking two centuries-holding screens is more than enough for us as a race
Here's a reminder, hololens from microsoft also costs 3500 per unit. Considering the technology inside this thing, it's not at all overpriced. Although you can get other VR headsets like Quest 3 for under 1000, they are not aiming for the same purpose. Vision pro is for you to get real works done, just like any other apple products. It's setting a standard for the industry, which is definitely an apple thing. I don't get what you mean by "unapple-like" in the video.
The issue is, they can’t just let everyone get a foot hold on the market, so they had to eventually release the head set. Even tho, and mark my worlds, the 4th generation will be what we all hoped it would be. And they needed to build that ecosystem. So this is the build up to 👓… however this is the best device I have ever had for ar/vr experience… by far. Also they cracked ar with vision os. Now it’s just working on the hardware. A lot of people said the same about the 1st iPhone, my phone can do mp3, email, internet.
you clearly do not know what "is apple"... I could go on about every product they pioneered in the 80 and 90, or in the 2000's, but maybe do some research before you claim to know what youre talking about.
Have you just introduced to Apple..? You’ve never heard of Lisa…? Or Macintosh Portable…? Or the first iPhone…? So being a total none Apple like is a very wrong sentence unless you don’t know anything Apple..!! Also Apple Vision Pro is way cheaper than all above compared to their competitors of their time and more justifiable to the consumers…
![Yeat & Quavo - 5BRAZY [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4XxnTAwyxus/mqdefault.jpg)
Me reading these comments 👁️👄👁️
Partly that's because you're taking a negative stance, and people who don't care about, or like, the VP, are not searching out videos about it. That means your audience is inherently people who are excited about the product, as it's only people interesting the VP who's going to watch this.
History has shown how this will play out many times over, and with that said, it's fine you think it's going to flop, as time will prove you wrong, so that's no sweat off my back. My beef with your video hasn't been with your position it will flop, which is a valid stance; even if its wrong. My beef has been your false characterization that this launch/product is un-Apple-like, and from the comments, it seems that's what most people are complaining about as well. Any student of Apple knows just how quintessentially Apple-like this entire thing is.
I’m not sure there’s a correlation between excitement for the product and someone like me stating it’s not like Apple. I’m beyond excited for it! But I genuinely think this doesn’t fit for apple
@@JerrysTalks Dude, are you serious? I don't care about your excitement, it doesn't matter. You made a video arguing that the Vision Pro is not Apple like, which is just wrong, as everyone has pointed out, I, myself, in great detail. But in the comment you just made you said, you "think it's going to flop." That's a negative sentiment (in addition to your erroneous opinion about how unlike Apple this situation is). You're pitching this bad take about how unlike Apple this is, as well as your negative opinion about the successfulness of the product, to a group of people who are more informed about Apple than your average person, and who are interested in the device, and you don't think that's going to cause backlash? (The only people watching VP videos are Apple fans who are interested in the VP.) You yourself said, "oooof tough crowd is an understatement." And yet you don't see the correlation between excitement for the product (which is what your entire viewership for this video is, "people who are *interested* in watching VP videos") and the backlash your negativity is bringing on? (Erroneous negativity at that.)
Maybe you should find something else to do, because you can't see the barn door you just walked face first into. Like the obvious mismatch between your video's audience and your opinion could not be more clear. That means for "some reason" your video is attracting the attention of a lot of people who don't agree with you, that reason is pretty obvious. Because the ONLY reason people are watching this video is because it's about the VP, and you have a bad take that the people specifically watching VP content don't agree with.
Everyone who disagrees with you is welcome to go buy one... 🤣
Why don't you set an appointment to try it out so you can have an actual valid opinion? I did think iPad was useless when it first came out. Now, it is my go to device for entertainment.
I agree!
Seriously dude ? Click bait!
How? What about this was clickbait?
@@JerrysTalks it just makes no sense. This is absolutely an apple like product but I'm sure you trying to find a way to grab attention with your headline
@ointerface lmao did you watch this video? The whole video is about the thesis I stated in the title and why I think it’s the most un-apple like product yet. Nothing insinuated anything else. Clickbait would be me saying “Apple Vision Pro Unboxing” but the video is actually me ranting about the concept of the product. That’s clickbait…….?
its because you've done no research into apple product categories and its painfully obvious. Look at the first Mac, the first Mac laptop, the first iPod, the first iPhone, the first Apple Watch.. literally every first generation product has had these characteristics yet you're judging it against 10th-20th gen products. @@JerrysTalks
Totally don't understand where you're coming from. Everything about this is EXTREMELY Apple like. Just about every Apple product ever launched was half baked. Original Mac, completely useless, and $7.5k after adjusted for inflation. The Apple Lisa was $29k. The iPhone was a pile, and was 10x more expensive that other cell phones people were used to. The original Apple watch had TERRIBLE battery life, was slow, and couldn't run Apps natively, and was crazy expensive. Just like the original iPhone. The iPad was launched without native apps, and had to run upscaled iPhone apps, and was as expensive as an actual Mac! The original Apple Pencil had to be charged by awkwardly dangling off the bottom of the iPad in a very suggestive sort of way. I can keep going. I actually feel the Vision is less half baked than most of Apple's launches.
I think people are mostly turned off by the price, because they have grown accustom to Apple launching less technically significant products. However, the Vision has an M2, an R1, and TWO microOLED displays. Each one of these, and especially the displays, are large dies that have to be fabbed at a chip foundry. Imagine what it would cost you if you bought a mac with four processors in it? It would be more than Vision Pro money, but that's the amount of fab work we're talking about here. This is the most envelope pushing product Apple has ever released. Far more effort and R&D, and manufacturing cost, has gone into this than any product Apple has ever done. So yeah, it's expensive. At Apple's sales price, they are probably not make much on this device.
I completely agree with everything you’re saying here. This is a technological marvel of a product.
My point is solely on the TYPE of product. The AR/VR market feels more in its infancy than even foldable phones to me. The tech makes for a phenomenal demo, but in practicality, there is nothing intuitive about these big, bulky, headache inducing systems, with seemingly little-to-no consumer market.
I think that partly shows in the potential sales numbers, but more specifically here because this product doesn’t really solve anything and it shows by a lack of consumer interest. Yes, that partly has to do with the price, and yes apple has to start somewhere in order to tap into this market, I guess, but this market is to me what feels so un-Apple-like. Hopefully that makes sense.
@@JerrysTalks Apple's entering the space at the exact same time they always do. When the tech is just barely in reach to realize their vision. (No pun intended.) When Apple released the original Mac back in 1984, the hardware was only barely able to run the GUI (which was quite revolutionary back in 1984), and with only 128k of ram, the computer lacked the memory necessary to run any additional software, which was fine i guess, since there wasn't any. It wasn't until Apple updated the Mac the next year with the 512k version, that it actually became useful, not that sales figures were all that high (Apple was still living off of Apple II sales). When Apple came out with iPhone, it was the capacitance multitouch display, which had only just been developed, which enabled Apple to do the device. But backlight tech was still lacking, battery tech was still lacking, cellular modems were still lacking, the camera was hot garbage, the ARM processor they had to use could barely lift the OS, there was no flash, and Apple only barely managed to cobble together a mobile OS, so they couldn't provide third party app support, as the API infrastructure wasn't refined enough.
I don't want to take the time to bring you through every historical event, but Apple always launches their products when their goal is just barely within their grasp. The reason is, they want to be an industry leader, so they launch as soon as they can. Now many people say that Apple's innovations are not innovations at all, because there were GUIs before Mac, there were smart phones before iPhone, tablets before iPad, smart watches before Apple Watch, MP3 players before iPod, etc. However, Apple isn't trying to be first to demonstrate what is little more than an a lab proof of concept for the raw technology, they are trying to be the first to show the world the "proper way" to build a "cohesive" solution, and thus they usually are first to build a *successful* product. So they don't launch until the tech is advanced enough for the "proper way" to be visible, but they launch when they can only just manage it, which means, the industry is in its infancy. Of course, that's by design.
The PC industry was in it's infancy when they launched the Apple and the Apple II, and the Mac for that matter. Smart phones were in their infancy when they launched iPhone. MP3 players were in their infancy when they launched iPod. Tablets were in their infancy when they launched iPad. Smart watches were in their infancy when they launched Apple Watch. Notebook computers where in their infancy when Apple launched Powerbook. Apple is all about entering immature markets, so that they can force the market to mature in the direction they want it to go. They don't want to be last to the party. Just fashionably late.
I'm not sure what you mean there is "nothing intuitive"? You mean there are compromises to the experience? Sure, just like every other launch product. But using your eyes and hands to interact with the device is FAR more "intuitive" than anything anyone else has going on. The weight of the device, the size, has nothing to do with the "intuitiveness." They are just compromises one makes to get the minimum feature set Apple was shooting for, at the present level of technological ability. Nothing new, typical Apple.
I'm not sure what you're talking about sales numbers for. Very few of Apple's products sold gang busters day one. Mac sold absolutely terribly, and here we are, celebrating its 40th birthday this month. The sales figures are low because it's a launch product, and it's expensive. So what? That doesn't make it "un-Apple". How long have you been in the Apple ecosystem? Apple is notorious for having expensive products. Give Vision four generations of updates, and then get back to me as to how you think it's doing. Most of Apple's products don't even think about going mainstream until the fourth generation. It wasn't until the iPhone 4 that Apple really cracked the mass market, same for the Apple Watch with Series 4. In fact it took Mac 13 years before it started to go mainstream with the launch of the first iMac (that's like 7 generations).
Most of Apple's first gen products don't "solve" anything. The original Apple computer didn't solve anything, the original Mac didn't solve anything, the original iPad didn't solve anything, the original Apple Watch didn't solve anything. Like seriously, I don't understand your position. Sure it's not a fully polished product, that's gone through multiple generations, and has ten years of software written for it. But, like that's NEVER what Apple "launches" with. This is EXACTLY like every other major Apple launch. And I mean EXACTLY. And I've seen most of them first hand. And the ones I haven't, I've studied.
It’s unlike any apple product because it’s the future of all apple products. It’s a whole new foundation.
I feel like the most un Apple like would be the Apple car
Now that's no joke.
Agreed to that too
Sorry, I disagree with your opinions. This is absolutely like an Apple product, just in a new category. I have used it several times and can't wait to get mine in a few days.
That’s totally fair!
I’m tired of these sorry a$s RUclipsrs on their wack opinions that makes no sense at all
@KJ-ql4nm then how about you post your own?
@@JerrysTalks yeah I gotchu. You’ll be one of many on the thumbnail
you mean 180 THOUSANDS units sold.
They sold 140,000 in 4 days, might want to rethink your hypothesis…
I can’t rethink my opinion
That wasnt confirmed, also 140k is NOT alot when talking about apple
@@Warp2090considering they were predicted to only be able to make around 1M of those displays in the first year and each unit needs 2 of them, the fact they sold that many already is actually pretty good
Jerry Talks reading the Comments 👁️👄👁️
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 literally
Sounds like someone coming from android and only read the cliff notes to apple’s history. 🤣🤣
Every other product had a defined user it was selling to and had a defined place in the market. Who is the defined user of this product? What is the defined market? What is the primary use case of this? What demographic is this even for? $3499 for a product with no clear user in mind is very hard for average consumers to justify. The tech is the best technology I’ve ever seen it’s truly a marvel, but there is no defined user or use for this thing which is very ambiguous for such an expensive gen1 product.
@@JerrysTalksand that’s what Apple does! They create a new market. People said “there’s no market for this” when the iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch etc. came out. Now look at how fast they’re selling. 😃 Vision Pro will make its own mark. At 180,000 sold units in just a few days, @ $3400, I say it’s a great start. :)
@@mike1207976 What are you talking about? The smartphone, tablet, & smart watch markets existed before Apple jumped in.
Spot on! Market’s not defined, 1st generation is merely a luxury item AT BEST!
It’s the quintessential Apple product. Whenever this is downsized, it’ll make sense… not an iPhone but an eyePhone eventually
Not an Apply fanboy, I’m cool with eyePhones taking two centuries-holding screens is more than enough for us as a race
Im dumber now.
I just picked up mine after my demo. Feels pretty applie 🤷🏾♂️
Here's a reminder, hololens from microsoft also costs 3500 per unit. Considering the technology inside this thing, it's not at all overpriced. Although you can get other VR headsets like Quest 3 for under 1000, they are not aiming for the same purpose. Vision pro is for you to get real works done, just like any other apple products. It's setting a standard for the industry, which is definitely an apple thing. I don't get what you mean by "unapple-like" in the video.
The issue is, they can’t just let everyone get a foot hold on the market, so they had to eventually release the head set. Even tho, and mark my worlds, the 4th generation will be what we all hoped it would be. And they needed to build that ecosystem. So this is the build up to 👓… however this is the best device I have ever had for ar/vr experience… by far. Also they cracked ar with vision os. Now it’s just working on the hardware. A lot of people said the same about the 1st iPhone, my phone can do mp3, email, internet.
bro yapping on about nothing lmao. clearly needed the views and the sub
I love how you said that opinions can change. I would bet that you’ll change your opinion once you try it. I’ve did.
I’m sure it might!
you clearly do not know what "is apple"... I could go on about every product they pioneered in the 80 and 90, or in the 2000's, but maybe do some research before you claim to know what youre talking about.
When did I claim I knew what I was talking about? All I did was provide an opinion😂
They gotta have us wanting it before we can afford it
Really really nice photographs on the wall behind you. What’s happening over your left shoulder though looks like a disaster
You sounds like Steve Ballmer when he laughed at the iPhone and its price then years later you can tell who was wrong.
Yes I do
Have you just introduced to Apple..?
You’ve never heard of Lisa…? Or Macintosh Portable…? Or the first iPhone…? So being a total none Apple like is a very wrong sentence unless you don’t know anything Apple..!!
Also Apple Vision Pro is way cheaper than all above compared to their competitors of their time and more justifiable to the consumers…
No lmao
Samsung was first
😂😂😂