Veteran Apple analyst Gene Munster predicts Apple will lead the smart glasses market but questions whether glasses can achieve mainstream success, surpassing 500 million units annually. Unlike headphones or watches, glasses face unique adoption hurdles, such as fashion, comfort, prescription challenges, and privacy concerns. Wearing something on the face is a significant ask. Munster’s view is that even if Apple excels, the smart glasses market will likely peak at a few hundred million units yearly, falling short of the potential of phones or pocket-sized devices.
Gene Munster for GemeMunster.com:
I’ve been researching and investing in Apple for a long time, and don’t remember a more memorable seven months when it comes to product development. In March, the company announced the new AI-powered Siri would be delayed for about a year…
This week’s reporting from Gurman that Apple has paused development of Vision Pro and redirected resources toward lighter, more wearable devices stands alone in modern Apple product development as a miss. Putting the two together, we get a sense of how hard it is to predict and productize where the world is going.
It’s easy to harp on Apple’s recent misfires given it is so out of character. What’s more constructive is to ask ourselves, does Apple have the right north star by going for glasses, and do they have the technical chops to get the job done and be a player in the market. Relative to Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses, Apple has meaningful advantages in retail, distribution, and integrating hardware, software, and services.
Some evidence that it’s hard: Meta’s latest glasses are sold in Best Buy stores but require Meta employees to staff the aisles. Apple, in contrast, has a global retail footprint and experience driving mass adoption of new categories. This advantage will help Apple, but the ceiling for glasses remains lower than phones or pocket devices.
Bottom line, I believe in the glasses race, Apple will win… My take is even if Apple succeeds, this segment will cap at a few hundred million units annually, which is below the potential of phones or pocket companions.
I believe a pocket-sized AI device will in five plus years emerge as a winner. Its strengths are speed, ambient context, and a simpler privacy model compared to glasses. This device would not need to replace the phone but rather complement it.
Consumers will need a reason to carry an additional device, which was the same hurdle faced by Apple Watch, which took three years to gain traction. The Jony Ive device will first be shown off next year and volume production is expected in 2027. If pocket companions deliver speed, reliability, and privacy at scale, they could become the next great consumer hardware category.
MacDailyNews Take: The question is how does a “pocket-sized AI device” differ from the already pocket-sized iPhone and its Android knockoffs. The iPhone already has everything needed – microphones, cameras, fast processors, display, speakers, connectivity, etc. Why carry a “pocket-sized AI device” when you already carry a smartphone that could, via settings, be set up to match whatever the “pocket-sized AI device” offers (always listening, etc.) and exceed it (on-device LLMs, etc.)?
As for smart glasses:
Meta’s glasses are hardly smart, nor are they a threat to Apple. There is no substitute for Apple’s vast ecosystem. As soon as Apple releases its first pair of smart glasses it will quickly become that nascent market’s leader. – MacDailyNews, October 2, 2025
Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
the difficulty of Apple’s glasses V.1 will be to make a compelling case WITHOUT projections.
projections onto the lenses are so critical for these things to become interesting and useful and exciting for users, that producing a version without that, as is rumored for V.1, seems like it will engender the usual Apple criticism (lack of innovation, etc.).
It’s the version WITH projections, whenever that arrives, that defines the real product category.
“Projections” onto lenses are highly overrated for smart glasses. Do we need more idiots glued to social media watching videos while crossing the street? Vision Pro has already demonstrated the peak of what AR ‘goggles’ are currently capable of and they’ll continue iterating the form factor (media reports of it being abandoned are overblown). Smart glasses however are tailored towards POV photos and video, audio like podcasts, calls and notifications, and of course AI. Take a look at Meta’s Display glasses and how you need a wrist band to interact with the tiny, headache-inducing screen in your peripheral vision.
We’re still far from a Vision Pro experience that fits into even chunky glasses (Meta’s Orion is a glimpse of it) and that’s fine because it’s meant for stationary work or leisure not for being out and about. Apple Glass will lean heavily on it being a lightweight accessory to iPhone like the Watch and AirPods.
By the way that often-shown ‘Apple Glasses’ concept image is hideous. I hope Apple has the good sense to create glasses people want to wear, which is a big ask even for people who wear glasses already where style preferences have been well-established for years.
“A pocket-sized AI device will in five plus years emerge as a winner. Its strengths are speed, ambient context, and a simpler privacy model compared to glasses. This device would not need to replace the phone but rather complement it.”
I agree with MDN x1000%. This “new device” is either an iPhone or an Apple Watch (or both working together). Other companies need it to be something else entirely (like a puck in your pocket, or glasses), but that’s only because they need something to displace the iPhone. But needing that doesn’t make it so.
Apple will make a great pair of glasses, no doubt, but it will be to deliver something along their AR/VR roadmap, with AI as a chaser.
Smartglasses at what cost? If Vision Pro is discontinued we lose the whole ‘new Mac’ capability. Vision Pro has the widest Mac Screen available and may be many other new features may come to Vision Pro back to Mac. I am deeply saddened by one option oF Mac I may lose. Bring the price down and fix the Mac in Vision Pro.
DO NOT THROW THE BABY WITH BATHWATER. MACS HAVE HAD DOUBLE DIGIT GROWTH Y-O-Y.
THE ‘M’ SERIES HAS REINVIGORATED MACS. KEEP THAT MOMENTUM GOING.
Fix the Mac friction points in Vision Pro, just fixe them.
AND BRING THE PRICE TO ~ $1,500.