Munster: Apple is well-positioned to own the future of personal computing with Apple Glass

Serial leaker Jon Prosser this week released a video concerning Apple’s forthcoming AR Glasses including the design concept, name (“Apple Glass”), price ($499 plus prescription, if needed), release date possibilities (Q421 or Q122), and more.

Apple's AR glasses - 'Apple Glass' - revealed

Gene Munster and Andrew Murphy for Loup Ventures:

Across its entire product ecosystem, including hardware and software, Apple has monetized its design advantage to achieve scale quickly. Apple Watch, for example, became a $5B business in less than three quarters from launch. Apple is now the world’s largest watchmaker. Apple’s core competency in design is widely appreciated by Apple users but under-appreciated by investors as an economic driver.

We continue to expect Apple to launch some sort of AR glasses in 2022.

The launch timing is uncertain, but one thing is clear: design will be central to Apple’s success in the glasses market. Apple’s track record with wearables, dating back to the EarPods, gives us confidence that Apple will lead the way in the augmented reality glasses category as it emerges over the next few years.

As wearables become the dominant mode for our digital interactions, Apple is well-positioned to own the future of personal computing.

MacDailyNews Take: Apple were “well-positioned to own the future of personal computing” with iPhone, too, yet Google, Samsung, etc. were able to steal the product with impunity or, in Samsung’s case, a slap on the wrist – just as Microsoft had done with the Mac prior.

As soon as Apple shows them how to do it, the copycats will be working overtime to knock off Apple’s innovations as always. Apple is, and has long been, the R&D center for the tech industry. As always, the ignorati of the world will snap up fake Apple smartglasses to go with their fake iPhones like the cheapskate value-illiterates they are.

The good news is that, in the case of the iPhone, Apple did and continues to own the market as measured by revenue share which is infinitely more important and valuable than unit share (anybody can ship boatloads of cheap junk at break even or less to amass unit share, as Samsung and 600+ other fragmandroid peddlers know all too well).

See also: Apple’s iPhone X made 5 times the profit of 600 Android OEMs combined — April 18, 2018

31 Comments

    1. applecynic is no copycat. he’s a copydog. A real woofer. Always barking up the anti-apple tree. lives to hate, it’s so sad. applecynic is feline like pussy

    1. 😂😂😂 Yeah. Unless I’m mistaken, Google tried this already. I am not strapping **** to my head to use my phone. Did Apple hire a bunch of former Google engineers?

  1. “Apple’s track record with wearables, dating back to EarPods…”

    That’s a weird thing to say. EarPods are just the current version of Apple’s standard wired headphones. Apple’s first popular “wearable“ product was the colorful and tiny 2nd gen (clip-on) iPod shuffle.

    1. Jackie Stewart… just another idiot like applecynic and CitizenX. Please just go and fark off, your rampant and incessant negativity and apple hate is very tiresome. Go to Bloomberg or Paul Thurrott, your apple hate will be really appreciated there.

      1. Your personal attack demonstrates the bankruptcy of intellect and your feckless argument. In short, you have no position of any relevance in this discussion and so are not worth anyone’s time.

        Apple hater? LOL. I have been an Apple user since 1980.

  2. There’s no guarantee, but Apple does pretty well with release of their product when the same kind already exists (music app, MP3 player, phone, tablet, watch, ear buds). Apple has Google Glass as a ref of what’s defined as POS, also.

    I think it’s going to be a killer product and it fits perfectly with Cook’s amping of AR.

  3. Munster is pretty much counting chickens before the eggs have hatched. I’ll hold my judgment of whether consumers want to wear $500 glasses until Apple Glass goes on sale and I can see for myself what they’re capable of doing. As of now, I honestly can’t imagine masses of consumers running out to buy them. I’m thinking maybe one-tenth the sales of AppleWatch. I’ve seen the Apple Glass concepts but fancy frames don’t convey all that much.

  4. I think to be a Copycat you need to be copying a successfully shipping product, not a generally pointless piece of pre production PR marketing gimmickry, which even failed in that limited task becoming a laughing stock to anyone beyond the deluded. I mean Alan Sugar still claims by licensing a little known hand held piece of cheap junk and putting it on the market a month before the long gestating Newton, that he invented that particular market and everyone else simply copied him but only idiots actually give it the time of day. Now Talking of Idiots …

    1. But then tell me how, according to MDN, Google would be copying Apple (with impunity) if they relaunched their own pre-production PR marketing gimmick? Pssst… Apple hasn’t shown anything yet.

  5. Apple seems to be more of a philosophical leader in tech. When I think R&D I think of innovators of new ideas. That’s sort of a random game. And Apple hasn’t put forth new ideas per se, but philosophically superior ideas that ground the industry.

    I suppose you could make the case for R&D of the tech industry, i.e. a product comes out and it’s groundbreaking and Apple fine tunes it—but it’s more than just research and development—it’s revising it philosophically with Apple’s superior ‘human’ values.

    And in some cases for Apple, of course, it’s getting too heavenly-minded where a product is almost no earthly-good…sad to say 🙂 … which is a fair place to stumble, perhaps more forgivable.

    this will cost me stars lol.

      1. “Apple has the benefit of learning from other’s mistakes”

        Ummmmm, yes, and so does every other company. Did you have a point or do you just enjoy stating the obvious?

    1. @Dee; per “philo leader in tech,” It sounds like there’s a little S Jobs thinking there….

      “Some people think design means how it looks. But of course, if you dig deeper, it’s really how it works. The design of the Mac wasn’t what it looked like, although that was part of it. Primarily, it was how it worked”

      Not sure about the “Too heavenly minded…”

  6. If wearables reach their full potential they’ll replace smartphones. Once again Apple isn’t scared to risk its own golden egg.

    On the downside, smartphone zombies will be replaced by glass zombies.

  7. With the iPhone initially powering it all, combined with the glasses and the AirPods…are going to comprehensive trio creating immersive zombie-hood. Humans will need to purposefully step away from the experience to reset to the fact that life is more than a digital experience.

    And, or, maybe they will (sadly) conclude; “is it?”

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.