This we can agree on.

See the OP’s ending sentence for reference.

No one is shitting on other people’s choices. They are criticizing a major corporations choices to skimp on specs while charging a premium price. Specs that can’t be upgraded and will absolutely lead to a shorter usable life. I find it odd that people get upset about criticism that isn’t aimed at them at all. The only thing I can think is maybe they realize they were ripped off after putting so much money into Apple products and they need to defend their financial decisions. Even then I don’t fully understand. I’ve purchased overpriced junk many times and don’t feel the need to defend the offending company. Maybe it’s because Apple has managed to make their customers feel like they’re in an exclusive club even though everyone uses Apple products these days. A publicly traded company is around to make money and nothing more. They should never be held in reverence.

If you choose to be a weak little quiet corporate Stan then that’s up to you. Apple is well aware that third party apps exist and they’re well aware that machines with less ram will need replaced far sooner than machines with more. RAM is cheap and Apples intigrated memory is no different in the regard. The only reason to use less is planned obsolescence. If you don’t believe that then you’re either Tim Cook or you’re an idiot.

Is this because of me?

I need it for personal protection.

Haha! Team 4% FTW

I’m all for crapping on large publicly traded companies but lumping Google in with companies that sell your data isn’t honest. Google does not and never has sold user data. They sure as hell use your data for their own ad network but they do not sell that data wholesale. Meta and other data brokers sell your data and this Avast company sells your data through a product they claimed stopped tracking. I’m not pro-Google but to compare their business model (which is very transparent about how it handles your data and how it’s never sold) to Avast’s business model (which is to completely lie to the end user while literally selling everything that user does) is not an honest comparison.

Apple pitched the Vision Pro as if VR hadn’t wasn’t already a thing that’s been around for a while. While the VP has some higher specs particularly in its display it lacks in areas like field of view, comfort, game selection and portability. The first group of people that would be interested are those who already own or have used other VR systems. They those people won’t see the VP as such a jump. Especially considering it’s locked to the Apples app store with not many VR options. The second group is composed of people who have been out of the loop and think this is the begining of VR. I think thats the camp more likely to return the unit once they realize it’s just a novelty in its current state.