I don't think the vibe significantly shifted in a positive way. It seemed like it was going to with Ternus' opening statements, but then it was back to the same vibe. Hard to put into words, but kind of a droning boring safe microsoft-y vibe. Craig Federighi brought more energy for his segment but he sounded almost sarcastic at times. John Srouji is a breath of fresh air. I liked Dr. Desai's vibe in the health section more than the average segment.
A real vibe shift might not even be possible if they don't bring back in-person live presentations. Can't believe they flew all these people in to play them a video. Though seeing how John Ternus' hands were shaking during his demo with ishowspeed, I don't know if they have it in them to go back to live presentations.
And what was the surprise in "surprise and shine" anyway? The name of it?
Yeah I was never the biggest fan of Craig Federighi previously but contrasted against the new generation of usual suspects being fielded by Apple, he actually stands out as having character.
But yes the format of the Apple Event was formulaic and way too scripted/produced. Sure there's a place for some scripted content but losing the live unscripted element makes it like a corporate event from Microsoft or IBM. In fact those guys probably do more live unscripted stuff nowadays.
The iPhone Duo is a nice change from formulaic iPhone designs but it's long overdue and is at best a sideways step not a forward step by an Apple that seems increasingly out of touch and driven by cloud service KPI-targets over all other metrics. I wonder how long it will be before the customer revolt manifests, not because I dislike Apple (I loved their products for years) but because I believe that their current business focus leads them to erode trust and play it safe which ultimately alienates the very demographics that made Apple cool and then persuaded all those wanting to emulate that demographic to join the Apple bandwagon. Many of those power users are increasingly moving to Linux or using Mac/Apple ecosystems tactically. It won't be many release cycles for Apple to become the new Microsoft - something you have to use for certain tasks in certain industries but increasingly something you would choose to avoid.
I think we are already there, Apple is already very much Microsoft like, just with a different history. Apple today is too big, too entrenched, too drunk on recurring revenue to be a "Think different" company.
I saw ~20 year old presentation where Craig Federighi presented (for first time??) - dude was shaking like leaf and could hardly do the demo.
It turned out fine and now he’s one of more charming presenters.
> Can't believe they flew all these people in to play them a video.
Apple can't afford to have demo problems or presentation glitches anymore. Hence the system that they have now.
An authentic Steve Jobs demo presentation would generate 100x more excitement than this canned, blan, nearly AI boring level cringe presentation. I'll just wait for a YouTube review where an actual human you can relate to handles it.
Peak state of technology in 2026
says who?
True, I remember years ago, the presenter was doing a demo and ran into a problem. He quickly transitioned to another identical device nearby, and continued almost seamlessly. Didn't seem like much of an issue. Although that might have been WWDC, which is a different crowd.
You can also readily find occasional videos of Steve Jobs throwing malfunctioning devices across the stage.
Interesting, do you remember which WWDC was that?
I’ve seen that happen a couple of times. I know there was an infamous Microsoft one, where the demo BSOD’d on Bill Gates (Not WWDC. I wasn’t there, but I’m sure there’s video). Microsoft used to demo real unstable stuff.
I remember one WWDC, where Ian Diery was giving a demo with a young man, and asked “Where’s the beef?” The kid looked down at his pants, and the crowd burst into laughter.
Diery did not laugh. He was a fairly serious chap, with no discernible sense of humor, so I expect his assistant was sanctioned for that.
I think the last DuDub I went to, was around 2005 (pre-iPhone). I know it was at Moscone. Jobs led that. He was one of the best presenters I’ve ever seen. He could recover from curveballs almost imperceptibly.
The first, was in 1987, or 1988. One of the first.
It feels like Apple is a company on autopilot, a well oiled money making machine, nothing else.
Remind me if AVP is proof that they have no creative spark or proof that they only do boring stuff that will sell 20m units?
Apple Vision Pro
Abbreviations waste people’s time
Here I thought we were discussing a return of the Aliens vs Predator franchise
Here’s my theory about AVP.
Apple’s strategic position is to be the main device by which apps and AI can gain access to end users. This puts them in a nice position to charge a toll on everything that passes through their device. Now if someone were to come out with a new type of device and a new paradigm that could disrupt iPhone as the main device, Apple would be in trouble.
Not long ago, Zuck seemed really confident about metaverse/AR/VR. Apple took the disruption threat seriously and countered with AVP. Now it looks like metaverse flopped. I suspect the priority of AVP has gone down inside Apple accordingly.
Interesting view, but not quite. The Big Changes in computing happen when both the mode of access, the demographic, and the primary use case change. So historically computing evolved from corporate server + batch -> real time "personal" scientific and technical -> mass market commodified PC for business and gaming -> social media, entertainment, and 'personal bureaucracy' (tickets, bank statements, and such) on mobile.
At each step the tech gets smaller and more physically accessible, the use case gets more interactive and less demanding and serious, and the demographic gets wider and less technically educated.
Apple owned a huge part of the last change with the iPhone.
What's the next step in the series?
Clearly it's not a huge device you strap to your face.
But it's also not an easy question to answer. What is the next step after social media?
From a software POV it's AI, but where's the matching hardware? The next gen has to be even smaller, multimodal, but still physically interactive, likely always on.
Glasses are the closest, but not there yet.
So I think we're still in the early Nokia mobile stage. The concept exists and the current tech is beginning to be workable, but the gamechanger refinement and perfection of the concept is still a way off.
The tech is workable. The issue is the AVP is heavy and big. So I'd say we're still at the Motorola brick phone not even the Nokia stage yet. Shrink the AVP down to glasses size and I'll agree on the Nokia analogy.
Are smart glasses not the modern, practical implementation of the metaverse. I don’t think Meta were banking on games and low-poly avatars for their next generation of revenue, it was more about building (and then — hold onto your lunch please — monetizing) new forms of social connectivity. The only difference is that your permanent social camera went from being in-game to in-reality.
Hadn't the Metaverse already well and truly flopped before the AVP came out? It's a cool device, but when it was released I felt like Apple was a couple years late and 3499 dollars short.
The AVP I thought looked like amazing hardware. It was just bizarre they didn't also go all in on making it useable for gaming.
They failed to come up with a strong selling point. Health is the big seller for Apple Watch. But AVP, at its price point, needs something better than "well you can watch movies on a big screen or work in a café while looking silly".
It absolutely failed to justify its price point IMHO. If it were affordable people would be finding uses for it, but when it is that expensive you basically need a business justification for buying one. That means you won't have a hobbyist community finding new and interesting things to do with it.
This leaves Apple and maybe a handful of subsidized third parties as the only people making applications for it, which is pretty much a guarantee that it will remain a tiny niche industry.
The Apple Vision Pro is basically a developer kit.
Agree, it’s basically the Apple Lisa all over again. Innovative, but not mass market.
But I think Apple learned some things from the Lisa, even though it barely sold.
I have no interest in using a headset in public or doing work on one.
Watching movies on a big screen would be interesting, but they still do not sell the device in my country in Europe, so I had no way to demo it and judge whether the quality is adequate for a home theater experience.
But remember health was a small thing when the watch was launched. Then the focus was on notifications, communications etc. Fitness was more of a ”oh and it also tracks your heart rate”
True. Seems like none of the VR devices have found their killer app.
Seriously, this (and pron) is the only use case that will appeal to the mass market for a single user, un-shareable, stupid looking, immersive thing like this.
For nice hardware with hardly any content, not making huge strides to get existing VR content on it was a terrible strategy. And Apple can afford to just buy one of the bigger players to get content too.
Apple never goes all in for gaming. They are more than happy to base most of its software revrnue on Skinner boxes, but otherwise it feels like it wants little to do with games.
Every 4-5 years they need something to show off their tech and they begrudgingly look to gaming studios to provide some demos for them. They get the demos, get some hype, then put it straight back into the box. Devs move on because they know their audience isn't there anyway. Rinse and repeat. This last time was to help show off their unified architecture with AAA games running on an IPad.
I think the lack of a AppleVision non-pro that was just some really good screens and a battery, hooked up to your iPhone/MBA/MBP for use as an immersive display was a miss. I tried the AVP but realized I didn't want/need to strap a Macbook to my face: I have a computing device, I just wanted the display.
Scrap the passthrough cameras, the LCD eyes, and all that complexity.
Yikes. I can’t imagine it without passthrough. You have to take it off to move around at all?
I can't imagine wanting to walk anywhere with massive clownish goggles on, and while tethered to the power box & various peripherals.
Still, a small camera is an odd thing to cut.
Yeah? It's just a display for sitting on the couch or in an airplane, watching videos or viewing a huge virtual desktop. Scrapping the cameras would save a ton on size, BOM, and complexity. Basically a "Pimax Dream Air" formfactor.
I'd love the ability to have AVP immersion with my MBP on a flight, and combined with Airpods, you'd be able to block out everything. I don't need to walk around and wouldn't need to interact through it. It's like transparency for Airpods: an overengineered alternative to just taking an airpod out (or in this case, lifting the headset up).
Short reminder to the younger folks that 30 years ago it felt just like that for Apple, and then they almost went bankrupt.
Did it? At that time, I felt like they were an expensive boutique manufacturer that basically catered to a niche audience of media professionals.
At the time, they weren't even among the biggest tech companies. Today, they are one of the largest companies in the world.
> Expensive boutique manufacturer that basically catered to a niche audience of media professionals.
As much true back then, as it is in 2026, with the added category of some GNU/Linux users buying shiny hardware and then complaining macOS UNIX implementation doesn't overlap with GNU/Linux, beyond regular POSIX.
Seriously? They were tiny, media production niche, crazily priced machines 30 years ago. Almost zero marketshare or mindshare, and most people (in e.g. EU) didn't even know anyone who owned a Mac.
Yes, it was pretty much Atari, Commodore, Acorn and PC over here, plus some lesser known brands, like MSX on Netherlands.
However even today, if you go to the European countries less fortunate with their economies, having anything Apple is usually obtained via credit, or some contract bundling, for example with the cable or Internet operator, naturally bound to a minimal duration of 24 to 36 months contract.
Not something like in US and countries with similar economies where most people don't think twice to get Apple gear, and quickly pre-order new gear after each couple of new product announcements.
> However even today, if you go to the European countries less fortunate with their economies, having anything Apple is usually obtained via credit, or some contract bundling
Given how many iPhones I've noticed suddenly showed up in hands of regular people, including teenagers, in the last couple years in Poland, I imagine there's healthy second-hand/used devices market going too. iPhones have reputation of being long lasting devices (battery shenanigans notwithstanding), maybe the reputation is true.
Still, https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/poland
However, yeah iPhones hold quite well in 2nd hand market.
Not exclusively so. They were 'big' in some schools with their original Apple 2 lines. Even looked good, considering the later models. By school I mean anything between grade 5 and 13.
It's incredibly how long an era of good decisions can allow a company to coast.
Apple silicon was not an autopilot decision, kind of an insanely cool decision.
Apple bought P.A. Semi in 2008, 18 years ago.
Apple Silicon was autopilot. Or more specifically the insanely cool decision happened under Jobs, and everything else is just coasting (i.e. repeating the same business success again and again without taking very many risks). Their first custom core design was the A6 in 2012, a year after his death, but they bought the team that made the design (P.A. Semi) in 2008. It took the team about a decade and change to scale up to something that could power a laptop, but the decision was made very early on and was specifically part of the same set of decisions that Apple has been coasting off of ever since. If Apple hadn't bought its own chip design firm they likely wouldn't have remained competitive long-term, in the same way that their computers got really uncompetitive for a few years before every major architectural transition.
Unless by "Apple Silicon" you specifically meant "the decision to transition from x86 to ARM". There is actual work there, but not a lot of risk. Apple famously maintained an internal x86 port of Mac OS X for years after Rhapsody was shitcanned and renamed "Mac OS X Server", so doing the same with ARM isn't that worse. iOS was derived from OSX; and just having iOS already up and running on ARM is already a good deal of the way towards a macOS port to ARM. In fact, it got easier as iOS got more technology hand-me-downs from macOS.
OpenSTEP was already multi-architecture when the merge happened, as NeXT was going cross platform to try the rescue the company at the time.
[dead]
I really miss the live presentations. They had a lot more humanity.
But I miss the Steve jobs presentations the most. I was watching one of his old presentations the other day from when he was in his 20s - he’s just so engaged and present and speaks from the heart compared to the polished media trained drivel of modern ceos
Does he have a problem with his hands shaking ? Or you just mean he's nervous
not sure, he doesn't have shaky hands in the videos though so I assume nerves
A live presentation fail could take 5~15% off their stock price in minutes, for no good reason at all.
People’s life savings are at stake.
I coded one of these for whatever was the latest Nokia handset ~2005. Live on-stage reveal and demo to the world's press by CEO IIRC. The software on the phone was supposed to run off our co-host server, but bugfixing down to the wire, so nobody knew but the demo was running off a half-built PC in my buddy's closet connected to his janky cable modem with us watching and sweating and praying. It would have been really, really bad if that demo had failed on-stage.
You had a closet? Luxury! Our demo ran out of a disused lavatory, and there was a leopard around.
Unless people are investing their life savings in about-to-expire options, any ridiculous short-term fluctuations in the stock price aren’t affecting them at all.
Valid except for the issue that the live authenticity was part what Apple's culture and cult following attractive to many of the power-users and creatives that made the brand gain enormous value.
Playing it safe with media-trained MBA-centric thinking to avoid volatility works on one level if that's the KPI you're monitoring but it doesn't track the invisible damage done to the brand. Apple is at real risk of becoming a stagnant, Microsoft-like behemoth to the very users that made it cool and that can turn into an exodus that pummels the stock by more than 5-15% for a few weeks and would be much harder to fix.
Ternus hasn't impressed me so far - he's a safe choice and the iPhone Duo is a safe level of innovation alongside the predictable spec bumps to the regular phones and watches. Macbook Neo devalued the brand permanently despite its popularity it kills hardware margins and shows Apple is looking to move all its customers to recurring revenue models using the cloud such that low margin hardware is no longer a problem as it provides a ramp for more customers to the cloud. However that model is now being pushed by Apple like cocaine yet the tech-savvy creatives and heavy weight tech users want something not that. Apple's success or failure medium to long term depends on them not losing relevance to those demographics or the brand value will drop way way way more than 15% for way longer.
I'd say a big part of the problem too is the culture that developed at Apple after they moved into their new Giant Ivory Sphincter HQ building. It's isolated the company from users and allows their internal culture to disconnect from the real world. Such a shame as the HQ could have really been awesome.
"We must protect the AAPL stockholders from the irrationality of the AAPL stockholders"?
Protecting people from themselves, 21st century edition.
Halt the trading!!!
finally an actual benefit to widespread generative ai ... supporting retirements
Everybody is nervous their first few times. Hell, I’d rather see that somebody’s nervous and actually human at this point lol.
Apple’s post-COVID keynotes have been like watching plastic people try to out virtue signal one another as they do their best Zuckerberg imitations. Nervousness and humanity anytime, please.
The first few years of recorded presentation was okay because they were showing the Apple Park building which was pretty unique and the transitions were super cool. But now, it's the same old stuff again and again. It's the same building, same transitions. Live presentations would be so much more authentic.
In the later presentations, presenters definitely looked like Autons of the Doctor Who, from the first episode of the Ninth Doctor, where they were CGI.