I must admit i don't particularly understand where this (alleged?) ignorance is coming from. The reasons are the same as they were ten years ago on the ios platform. It's for the consumer. It makes the consumer's experience better.

Pretending that consumers deserve an inferior netflix experience because you believe companies shouldn't charge each other money is insane.

Pretending that Apple provides a superior user experience due to their walled garden is insane.

We can both call other people insane. That doesn't make it true.

I use Android (work) and iPhone (personal) phones.

My experience with Apps on iPhone is much better. The Apps are better, there is less trash, the Apps get less of my personal data.

This is valuable to me.

Maybe App developers for iPhone are just better human beings than Android developers. I think that’s not the case, and it’s due to the walled garden.

We can argue about why this is the case. But at my company many have both ecosystems in their pockets all day, and no one has a private Android phone for these reason. Sample size 100+ people, with better things to do in life than recompiling code for their phones.

I get that if you want to hack on your phone, iPhone is not the right phone for you. The user experience for hacking on your phone vs using your phone as a non SW developer are allowed to be completely different. One market is significantly larger than the other.

There are no consumers…

A better experience for Apple users is in the universe where web apps function and aren't crippled to support a rent seeking business.

Agreed, Apple has yet to prove why companies need to support their niche luxury platform.

I guarantee the best Vision Pro experience will be exclusive to their own apps and nearly everything third party will be second class at best.

If they can’t make their device effortlessly seamless with existing apps, it’ll be a total failure.

> I guarantee the best Vision Pro experience will be exclusive to their own apps

Apple must know they need third party apps at launch and that those apps have to be good, so I expect they’ve worked with/pampered quite a few companies in the last year, helping them build a good Vision Pro app.

Because of that, I expect to see more third-party apps than Apple ones at launch, and I expect all of them to be good or at least very impressive to demo.

> and nearly everything third party will be second class at best.

If we interpret “nearly everything” as “the overwhelming majority”: that is the case on any App Store, so that’s not surprising.

Or they might try to launch it iOS style, provide stunted 3rd party experience, only first party full apps, and try to launch a 3rd party more complete support later.

What’s in it for these developers to support such an unpopular platform, where’s the money?

Firstly, Apple’s help may have made it fairly cheap for them to create their app.

Secondly, I guess some CEOs will fall for the status/prestige or for “if the neighbors have it, so must we” and for now, care less for the money.

Thirdly, there almost certainly will be few customers, but all buyers will be rich, even for iPhone users, and quite a few likely will be decision makers. If, say, Zoom has a good Vision experience, but MS Teams doesn’t, and that swings a CEO of a large company to switch to Zoom, that’s worth a lot of money for Zoom.

So, even if you’re completely rational and think it isn’t worth it, your fear that having a Vision app out will make some other CEO make the irrational decision that, therefore, your smartphone app is better, may be enough to make you decide to invest in a Vision app.