The game plan is the same as the game plan for the Mac, but they’re going to run it in a fraction of the time because they already have the playbook. Apple’s not in the business of “intentionally taking a loss,” Apple is in the business of slowly iterating products into platforms over strategic time spans. That’s exactly what they’ll do here.

The OLED displays are severely supply constrained; I doubt Apple can produce more than one or two million in 2024. With so few units available, there are more than enough dyed-in-the-wool Apple fans and die hard VR geeks with $4k to burn to guarantee that it will be sold out until 2025.

This first million will create an ecosystem for the platform in the form of third-party software and enthusiast communities. The successful launch will entice more suppliers to make the OLEDs, increasing availability and reducing cost. That paves the way for a sans-Pro Apple Vision for $2,500 sometime in 2025 or 2026. The cycle repeats: more users, bigger community, more evangelists, more word of mouth, more software, cheaper components, and then Apple ships Apple Vision Air in 2027 or 2028 for $1,500. Then in 2030, Apple Vision Air 2 comes out but the original is still for sale at $999.

Now we’re looking at Apple’s standard good/better/best product matrix that they use for the iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and Mac, and we’re also looking at a relatively Mac-like price range starting at a grand but with options running well above $5k.

The original Mac sold for $2,495 in 1984 which is about $7,000 adjusted for inflation. Apple’s kicking this new platform off for half the entry price. No one knew what the heck the Mac was supposed to be for in 1984 either, but the entire desktop computing paradigm was forged in its image. We’re now looking at a second Mac.

Right, I said it’s “not bad,” hardly a ringing endorsement. It had some good ideas and concepts but it also has a lot of flaws, which is why it’s quite unfortunate that it’s the best Discovery ever managed.

Right? Put Lorca on the front of my list to round out all four seasons. The outsiders carry the cast.

My problem with season 4 wasn’t that it was slow, but that it was uninspired and by-the-numbers. I had worked out that the DMA was a “stepping on an anthill” situation by… episode 4, maybe? 5 at the latest. So then I got to watch one of the oldest tropes in sci-fi unfold for 8 more episodes, played completely straight. Yawn.

I’d rather watch the B-plot from S01E06 of Babylon 5 to experience that particular story again. That way I’d be done in an hour.

Yes, exactly. Season 1 knew what it wanted to be. When it was over, I remember thinking “alright, not bad, I’m excited to watch this show grow the beard.”

But it never did. In retrospect, Season 1 is the strongest season the show had to offer. Each subsequent season got a little worse as plots got more confusing, themes got more muddled, and no breakout characters emerged to carry the show through an abundance of narrative turmoil and worldbuilding strangeness. But above all else, seasons 3 and 4 are just boring. I don’t care about the crew or their mission. The most interesting characters are consistently the outsiders: Pike, Vance, Rillak. I’ll be watching season 5, but mostly out of a sense of obligation and morbid curiosity.

As much as I like SNW, it’s still not quite the show I’ve been waiting since 2005 for: seven curious officers on a ship called Enterprise set in the mid-25th century. I worry that SNW has robbed us of the opportunity to see the classic formula set in the immediate post-TNG era… even though that seems to be what season three of Picard was explicitly setting up.

We all know the bubbles will still be green

Sokath, his eyes uncovered

Balderdash

trekkie.jpg

EDIT: Apparently everyone on this website is insane

The inmates are running the asylum

11 years old

“programmed obsoletism”

Serious question, how old is your laptop?

Star Trek is cool

What a lovely episode.

I saw a fair amount of skepticism across the Fediverse about how musical episodes are always bad and annoying, to which someone would always respond “well, Buffy nailed it.” Apparently the SNW writers feel the same way, because “Subspace Rhapsody” isn’t just a homage to “Once More With Feeling,” it’s a love letter. They may have swapped the demon for a subspace wedgie, but they kept the idea of using music to force the characters to confront their feelings about each other, and they even threw in a bunny callback.

10/10. I hope SNW maintains the tradition of a theatrically silly episode near the end of each season as long as it runs!

But again, the notion that NX-01 was called “Dauntless” before the Borg First Contact incursion is your headcanon. No one working on Enterprise ever attested to that, and Cromwell’s casting as Cochrane is certainly not evidence of this alteration.

You started this conversation by saying “They did the same thing for First Contact” and I just want to know who “they” is and what the “same thing” that “they did” is. You’ve brought up this Dauntless/Enterprise theory twice now but that’s certainly not evidence that any “they” did any “thing.” As far as I can tell it is your headcanon for a relatively minor inconsistency that could have any number of other explanations, the most obvious one being that Arturis got a detail wrong.

I just find it incredibly hard to believe that anyone working on Enterprise was working on the assumption that they were creating a show in a timeline that was “altered” by the events of First Contact. That was never alluded to in the show’s four year run and as far as I know no one working on that show ever said anything of the sort.

How does Cromwell reprising Cochrane in “Broken Bow” support the notion that Enterprise is in a different timeline from all previous Star Trek? I don’t see how these things are connected at all.

Interesting headcanon, but headcanon nevertheless. I’d wager heavily that neither the First Contact nor Enterprise production staff share this interpretation, much less intended it.

they have the actors say “these events weren’t supposed to happen” repeatedly on screen?

The purpose of the “time has been altered and we need to fix the timeline” conversation that occurs near the beginning of every time travel story is definitely not to inform the audience that every subsequent installment of Star Trek will occur in an altered timeline.

In fact, it’s just the opposite. The entire reason the characters are so concerned with restoring the timeline is that they want to return to their lives in an unaltered timeline.

I don’t really care if they mess around with continuity if continuity is interfering with a good story they want to tell. My point is that the SNW writers are making a clear and concerted effort to maintain continuity.

Has the writing staff of First Contact ever confirmed, on the record, that it was their intent to alter the timeline? Has the writing staff for Enterprise ever indicated that they intended to depict an “altered” timeline?

and there could be some minor adjustments with the characters to accommodate the story that showrunners want to tell.

Other than the Kelvin timeline where they said up front “THIS IS A DIFFERENT TIMELINE,” when has that ever happened?

Keep in mind, we’re talking about showrunners who contrived a reason for Pike to be “fleet captain” for a single episode just so they could have Kirk and Pike interact without invalidating one line from TOS: “Court Martial.” These are not the type of Star Trek fans who are going to make “minor adjustments” and justify it with “well you see back in S02E03 we changed the timeline, so now we can do whatever we want!”