It is the same Apple after the first time Jobs went away, however this time he isn't coming back.

And while Apple has millions to burn, they better find something else other than doing iPhones.

Funny thing is, Apple probably thought the iPod would be a niche product that would only appeal to existing Apple customers when they developed it. If they did not take the risk, they probably wouldn't exist today.

While I don't think the Vision Pro is a good fit for Apple (most of their products are portable, while the Vision Pro is unlikely to have much uptake outside of the home and office), it is hard to gauge whether it would be adopted without actually bringing it to the market.

Son, I’m going to tell you one word that will change this company forever: SERVICES

You can connect a trackpad and keyboard to the AVP. Interestingly a trackpad worked but not a mouse. You can also connect a normal controller (like Xbox/PS).

From what I heard, they will ultimately halt production, assuming no major changes in sales, at around 500,000 - 600,000 produced. Based on my understanding of the sales, they will have a considerable number of units still available even if the production stops.

Before its release, I read that Sony had said they could produce 900,000 of the displays per year because the process was so complex. Obviously with 2 displays per device, half that is the maximum number of Vision Pros per year.

I'm guessing Apple and Sony would have invested in improving the process if it had hit expectations.

Sony display had capacity for 1 million screens in 2024. That's 500K devices. They are stopping short of that, but we don't know by how much. I'll estimate 400K devices made and sold in 2024 as the Pro model is sunset and Apple takes a shot at a Quest competitor in the $1000-2000 range.

This seems to be specifically a change in the assembly volume. I imagine they have most of the specialist components, such as the screens, already delivered and stored.

> Everyone thought I was crazy for thinking this thing would get no traction.

I've yet to find someone who thought a $3500 headset would be a smash hit.

> Everyone thought I was crazy for thinking this thing would get no traction. People want to spend less time plugged into screens, not less

Almost everyone I know (and people here on HN) thought this would be niche at $3500. But that doesn't mean people don't want to be plugged into screens. They totally are plugged into screens - just not Vision Pro.

Or they believe the price to be too high for beta-testing a first-gen Apple device.

We want more screens, just easier to use them. We are too lazy to even stand up to wear a headset. We want them in front of us all the time, everywhere, without moving a finger, instantly!

I don't think I saw anyone (media talking heads looking for engagement do not count) who said this product would be popular.

AVP user here who is wanting to get less plugged into screens.

What I really mean by that though, is that I want to make my screen time more meaningful. I don’t want to mindlessly scroll, like I often find myself doing, or like I see others doing in places like grocery store lines or on the subway.

The Apple Vision Pro is a very expensive, specialized device. When I use it, it's mostly to watch movies, TV shows, or other immersive content, but it’s still mainly just for entertainment. But I can't just sit in it and disassociate the same way I might my phone--I don't feel that it's built that way.

As for getting no traction, yeah that's correct. It's too expensive. I still love mine.

> People want to spend less time plugged into screens, not less.

Yes. I threw my phone away 2.5 years ago (after my 3yo daughter kept saying "no phone dadda") and it has made my life significantly better. Like living in the 1990's again.

In a land of the distracted, the phoneless man is king.

That being said, I think the AVP is very cool technology, and will have important applications in the years ahead. (Just not mass market for a long time, if ever)

Second Life doesn't pretend to be anything it's not, so it attracts an audience who want that authenticity.

Apple and Facebook are the polar opposite of that. They look at a product segment and think "How we do sell this to X million people?" Turns out that regular people that buy iPhones and Macbooks, might not be as interested in VR.

> well i can't think of a single killer app for this or any VR headset for me.

For a headset the size of a pair of glasses?

* A well-designed HUD that can seamlessly integrate 95%+ of the "utility functions" (as opposed to entertainment functions) from my phone into my field of vision. Calls, messages, navigation, calendar, notes. I never want to look at my phone unless I'm bored.

* One of those "speed reader" [0] apps that will flicker a message at 600WPM at me. This should probably interface with all long-form text.

* Subtitles/translations for the people I talk to.

* An "offline dating" app that only allows you to swipe people you see

I firmly belive AR is the future of personal computing, but the hardware needs to gain an order of magnitude in capabilities.

[0] https://www.spreeder.com/app.php, but smarter (word groups, adjust displaytime for word complexity)

This is such an odd take. Like trying to defend Apple from an accusation that was not made - The headline is a good representation of the news; production was suspended because they are sitting on too much unsold stock. Typically in-demand products with limited availability go out of stock fast and don't sit unsold.

This is why it always frustrating to read any negative news on companies like Apple or Tesla. They have some annoyingly sycophantic fanbase that always wants to downplay and misdirect any bad news.

If Microsoft made some AR glasses that sat unsold and they suspended production, no one would show up to say "actually, it is not being discontinued, nothing to see here". Nor should they.