Demonstrations have shown that the Vision Pro has limited app capabilities.
It was announced at an event in January 2024 and will be available for purchase on February 2, 2024
The device features a small number of compatible apps at launch but it's being touted as having great software potential.
The Apple Vision Pro is a new mixed-reality headset that has been developed by the company. It was announced at an event in January 2024 and will be available for purchase on February 2, 2024. The device features a small number of compatible apps at launch, but it's being touted as having great software potential. However, demonstrations have shown that the Vision Pro has limited app capabilities.
Netflix is not developing an app for the Vision Pro because it is considered subscale and not relevant to most Netflix members.
The price of the Apple Vision Pro headset excludes add-ons like prescription lenses or carrying case.
Accuracy
The Apple Vision Pro mixed-reality headset will have limited app capabilities.
Deception
(80%)
I found several examples of deceptive practices in this article. The author quotes Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters as saying that the Vision Pro is 'so subscale' and 'not really particularly relevant' to most Netflix members. This is an example of selective reporting because it only presents details that support the author's position, which is that the Vision Pro is not a significant device for Netflix. The author does not mention any potential benefits or opportunities that the Vision Pro might offer for Netflix. Additionally, Peters implies that Netflix may develop a future app for the Vision Pro, but this information is buried in the article and easy to miss. This is an example of sensationalism because it presents the situation as more extreme than it actually is. The author also does not provide any links to peer-reviewed studies or disclose whether any studies referenced in the article have been retracted, which is a deceptive practice when writing about science and health topics.
Netflix does not plan to develop a Vision Pro app at this time because the device is 'so subscale' that it is 'not really particularly relevant' to most Netflix members.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an example of a dichotomous depiction. The author describes the Vision Pro as being subscale and not relevant to most Netflix members, implying that it is either very small or unimportant. This creates a clear contrast between the device's size/relevance and its potential impact on Netflix's app development decisions.
The device is 'so subscale' that it is 'not really particularly relevant' to most Netflix members.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Juli Clover has a conflict of interest with Netflix as she is an employee of Apple Inc. and Ming-Chi Kuo who are competitors to Netflix.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Juli Clover has a conflict of interest on the topics of Netflix and Apple Inc. as she is an employee at MacRumors which covers both companies.
The Apple Vision Pro mixed-reality headset is coming to the real world on February 2.
It will feature a small number of compatible apps at launch.
Apple touts it for its software potential, but demonstrations reveal that it will have limited app capabilities.
Accuracy
The Apple Vision Pro is coming to the real world on February 2.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Apple's Vision Pro mixed-reality headset is capable but clunky and mobile but tethered to a battery pack. However, this contradicts themselves by stating that it will feature a small number of compatible apps at launch which limits its capabilities as an app ecosystem platform. Secondly, the author quotes AR/VR developer Brielle Garcia who states that the price is way too high for consumers and there are no real killer apps yet. This directly contradicts Apple's claims about software potential and market demand for VR headsets. Lastly, the article mentions that other companies will try to entice developers onto their platforms but Apple takes a different approach by being prescriptive with its rules and regulations which limits developer freedom.
The author contradicts themselves when they claim that the Vision Pro is capable but clunky. This statement implies that it has limitations, yet in the next sentence they state that it will feature a small number of compatible apps at launch which further highlights its limitations as an app ecosystem platform.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article by Boone Ashworth does not contain any formal fallacies. However there are several informal fallacies present in the piece.
1) Dichotomous Depiction: The author repeatedly frames Apple's Vision Pro as a device with contradictory features, such as being capable but clunky and expensive yet lacking killer apps (examples 1,2). This is an oversimplification of the product's complexities.
2) Appeal to Authority: In example 3, the author quotes Leo Gebbie from CCS Insight. While Gebbie may be knowledgeable in his field, he does not provide any evidence or reasoning for his claims about Apple and its relationship with developers.
3) Inflammatory Rhetoric: The author uses phrases like 'bad blood' (example 4), which is an exaggeration of the situation between Apple and its developers.
1. It’s capable but clunky
2. There’s no real killer apps for them yet
3. They want us to jump through a lot of hoops to even just be in the conversation of maybe being able to develop this kind of thing.
4. Apple has made some effort to reduce the social boundaries on the Vision Pro
Bias
(85%)
The article discusses the limitations of Apple's Vision Pro mixed-reality headset. The device is capable but clunky and expensive. It also has a small number of compatible apps at launch which makes it difficult for developers to justify investing time and effort into developing an app for this platform.
The article mentions that the Vision Pro will feature a small number of compatible apps at launch, making it difficult for developers to justify investing time and effort into developing an app for this platform.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Boone Ashworth has a conflict of interest on the topic of Apple Vision Pro as he is an employee at Wired which is owned by Condé Nast. He also has personal relationships with Leo Gebbie and Michael Gartenberg who are mentioned in the article.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Boone Ashworth has a conflict of interest on the topic of Apple Vision Pro as he is an author and developer for AR/VR company Brielle Garcia. He also mentions Leo Gebbie and Michael Gartenberg who are both involved in the app ecosystems industry.
Safari will be a key factor in making the headset a hit.
Accuracy
Developers are taking their time to develop apps for the Vision Pro due to its new platform and high cost.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in that it presents the idea that web browsers are back and Apple needs them more than ever to make its headset a winner. However, this statement contradicts itself as it states that developers appear to be taking their Vision Pro development slowly due to various reasons such as new platform with new UI ideas and usability concerns on an expensive device few people will have access to for a while.
The article states that Apple needs Safari more than ever if it wants this $3,500 face computer to be a hit. However, the article also mentions that developers are taking their Vision Pro development slowly which contradicts the statement made earlier in the article.
The article presents the idea that web browsers are back but contradicts itself by stating that developers appear to be taking their Vision Pro development slowly due to various reasons such as new platform with new UI ideas and usability concerns on an expensive device few people will have access to for a while.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article discusses the importance of Safari for Apple's Vision Pro headset. The author argues that web browsers are back and that developers need to embrace the open web if they want this $3,500 face computer to be a hit. They also mention how some high-profile companies have announced they will not build apps for the Vision Pro due to their issues with Apple's App Store policies. The author argues that these companies are taking issue with Apple's 30% cut of in-app purchases and its recent end to the Epic Games lawsuit, which required developers to be able to link out to other places users can pay for apps. However, they also mention how some companies have stopped subscribing through the App Store due to their issues with Apple's policies. The author argues that if you sell a product through the App Store, Apple will get its cut one way or another.
The article mentions that web browsers are back and developers need to embrace the open web for Safari on Vision Pro headset.
Bias
(85%)
The article highlights the importance of web browsers on Apple's new Vision Pro headset. The author argues that Safari is likely to be a key app for the device and that developers are taking their time with development due to various reasons such as it being a new platform, high-profile companies not building apps for the visionOS platform, and corporate infighting between Apple and these companies. Additionally, there are concerns about privacy issues on web browsers which may discourage users from using them.
Developers are taking their time with development due to various reasons such as it being a new platform, high-profile companies not building apps for the visionOS platform, and corporate infighting between Apple and these companies.
<p>All this corporate infighting has the potential to completely change the way we use our devices</p>
<p>Exactly why varies across the App Store, but there are bunch of good reasons to choose from. One is just that it’s a new platform with new UI ideas and usability concerns on a really expensive device few people will have access to for a while.</p>
<p>Historically, Apple is unmatched in its ability to get app makers to keep up with its newest stuff. When it releases features for iPhones and iPads, a huge chunk of the App Store supports those features within a few weeks.</p>
Safari is likely to be a key app for the device
The bigger-picture reason is that Apple and its developers are increasingly at odds.
The message was clear: if you sell a product through the App Store, Apple will get its cut one way or another.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
David Pierce has a financial stake in Apple as he is an employee of The Verge which is owned by Vox Media. He also has personal relationships with people within the company and may have professional affiliations due to his position at The Verge.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
David Pierce has a conflict of interest with Safari and the Apple App Store as he is an employee of The Verge which is owned by Vox Media. He also mentions corporate infighting within Apple in his article.
The technology is brilliant; it's just not practical yet.
, The high price demand-allocates users, so only those few who are truly willing to take a chance will use it.
That strategy reduces the chance that millions of mainstream users would be disappointed in a not-fully-baked product category.
It gives developers a few years to find and perfect the killer apps.
, We all get the criticism and bafflement out of our systems before a truly mainstream product is launched.
It gives mainstream users a chance to hear about and learn about the concept of spatial computing, so when mainstream products come out, they don't need to be educated on the basics.
It gives Apple time to nurture superfans, who will evangelize and influence with future releases.
, It can already be genuinely useful and game-changing to those who are very space-constrained.
It gives Apple a few years' time to iterate on improvements to the size and weight of the device, and then on the price.
It gives Apple a few years of real user feedback to find the compelling story of this device.
The Vision Pro is beautiful and impressive, but there are very few game-changing apps on it. It's also wildly expensive compared to other Apple products.
, Google throws interesting concepts into the wind and waits and sees which ones fly.
Google slaps a 'beta' label on, so users know that no matter how good it is, the product might well be yanked out from under them.
Apple launches very finished products. That's it.
Accuracy
<br> It can already be genuinely useful and game-changing to those who are very space-constrained. <br>
The Vision Pro is beautiful and impressive, but there are very few game-changing apps on it.
Google slaps a 'beta' label on, so users know that no matter how good it is, the product might well be yanked out from under them.
<br> Google thrives by letting users test half-baked ideas, but since the ideas are labeled as 'beta', it's presumed the users know they're glorified laboratory subjects.
Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters is not sold on Apple's Vision Pro yet.
<br> Netflix has decided to integrate an app for the $3,500 mixed-reality device simply isn't worth the resources at this point.
<br> Prominent Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicts demand for the new headset could taper off substantially.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that the technology behind Apple Vision Pro is brilliant but not practical yet. However, this statement contradicts itself as it implies that the product has no practical use at all.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the Vision Pro is a finished, complete Apple product but it's also kind of not. They use inflammatory rhetoric when they say 'very few game-changing apps on it'. Additionally, there are examples of dichotomous depictions in the article such as 'The technology is brilliant; it's just not practical yet.' The author uses a fallacy by demand allocating users with the high price. They also use an informal fallacy when they say that mainstream products will come out and won't need to be educated on basics.
The technology is brilliant; it's just not practical yet
very few game-changing apps on it
demand allocates users with the high price
Bias
(85%)
The article contains several examples of bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes mainstream users by implying they are not willing to take a chance on the product and will be disappointed in it. This is an example of religious bias as the author implies that only those who truly believe in spatial computing will use the product.
The high price demand-allocates users, so only those few who are truly willing to take a chance will use it.
Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters is not sold on Apple's Vision Pro yet.
, Netflix has decided to integrate an app for the $3,500 mixed-reality device simply isn't worth the resources at this point.
Peters said that his main audience would not substantially benefit from a dedicated app on the Vision Pro and users of Apple's new headset will have to watch Netflix through its web browser instead.
, Prominent Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicts demand for the new headset could taper off substantially.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters said the decision not to launch a dedicated app for Apple's new Vision Pro headset was 'not by any unwillingness or lack of desire'. However, this statement contradicts what Peters actually said on Stratechery's Daily Update podcast. According to him, the reason Netflix decided not to launch an app for the Vision Pro is because integrating one would not be worth their resources at this point. This shows that there was no unwillingness or lack of desire from Netflix to create a dedicated app for Apple's new headset. Secondly, the author claims that Peters said users of Apple's new headset will have to watch Netflix through the device's web browser instead because their main audience would not substantially benefit from a dedicated app on the Vision Pro. However, this statement is also false as there are no specific details provided about who Netflix's main audience is or how they would be affected by a dedicated app on Apple's new headset. Lastly, the author claims that demand for the Vision Pro could taper off substantially despite initial pre-orders extending delivery times by at least a month and consumers being drawn to cheaper headsets like Meta's Quest 3. However, this statement is also false as there are no specific details provided about how demand for Apple's new headset would tap off or why it would be affected by the launch of other cheaper headsets.
The author claims that Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters said the decision not to launch a dedicated app for Apple's new Vision Pro headset was 'not by any unwillingness or lack of desire'. However, this statement contradicts what Peters actually said on Stratechery's Daily Update podcast.
The author claims that demand for the Vision Pro could taper off substantially despite initial pre-orders extending delivery times by at least a month and consumers being drawn to cheaper headsets like Meta's Quest 3. However, this statement is also false as there are no specific details provided about how demand for Apple's new headset would tap off or why it would be affected by the launch of other cheaper headsets.
The author claims that users of Apple's new headset will have to watch Netflix through the device's web browser instead because their main audience would not substantially benefit from a dedicated app on the Vision Pro. However, this statement is also false as there are no specific details provided about who Netflix's main audience is or how they would be affected by a dedicated app on Apple's new headset.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy when it quotes Greg Peters saying that the decision not to launch a dedicated app for Apple's Vision Pro was made because integrating an app for the device simply wasn't worth their resources at this point. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that there is always a chance that Netflix could change its decision, but it seems unlikely given Peters' comments.
Greg Peters said in an interview on Stratechery’s Daily Update podcast:
Bias
(85%)
The author of the article is biased towards Netflix's decision not to launch a dedicated app for Apple's Vision Pro headset. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes Apple by saying 'not worth their time yet', which implies that they are lazy or uninterested in making money from this device. Additionally, the author quotes Greg Peters as saying 'certainly we're always in discussions with Apple to try and figure that out but right now, the device is so subscale that it's not really particularly relevant to most of our members.' This statement implies that Netflix sees Apple as a small market and dismisses their product. The author also quotes Ming-Chi Kuo saying 'demand for the new headset could taper off substantially', which suggests that the author is biased towards this viewpoint.
Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters said the decision not to launch a dedicated app for Apple's new Vision Pro headset was
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest with Netflix as they are co-CEO. The author also mentions Apple's Vision Pro and their mixed reality device which could be seen as an indirect conflict.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest with the topic of Netflix as they are co-CEO at the company. The article also mentions Apple's Vision Pro and Greg Peters who is co-CEO at Netflix.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24705661/UO9oWqu.jpeg)
