0:00
/
0:00
0:00
/
0:00
Presence is the
Next Frontier
in Connectivity
Overheard at ON_Discourse
Editors Note: What if Internet 2025 was really a story about enhanced digital infrastructure? The majority of the future-speculation focuses on novel consumer tech experiences but pays little attention to reimagining the way devices connect. This perspective comes from a technology executive who has a compelling vision for how humans and devices will soon interoperate.
This post was written by a human and narrated by an AI-generated voice. (powered by Wondercraft.ai).
0:00
/
0:00
The next internet is going to manifest most inside your home. It will transform all of the web-connected devices that currently operate inside into a hyper-personalized, ultra-connected, interoperability hub. This is not IoT; this is the era of connected presence.
You may not have noticed this, but we need an upgrade in connectivity. Since 2019, the number of connected devices inside homes has increased 40%. Consider this trend as new web-based gadgets continue to hit the market. The Apple Vision Pro is a niche product today but it is only a matter of time before it gets added to the TVs, phones, tablets, game consoles, computers, watches, and fitness devices that are currently tapping into the average household’s WiFi signal.
The hardware might be modern, but the connectivity is not. Connectivity today is limited and fundamentally unaware of its surroundings. It is a dumb two-way exchange: the devices get data from the internet so the user can access relevant data from the device. Many household devices serve multiple members, organizing multiple account preferences and experiences for each respective member. This all might sound too obvious, but consider this: the smart TV is pretty dumb when you turn it on; you have to tell it who you are before it can do its thing. These devices are connected to the internet but not to the people.
Since 2019, the number of connected devices inside homes has increased 40%
The people in a room with a device contain enough information to transform its functionality into a deeply personalized, relevant experience.
The next internet is going to know who is turning the TV on, every time. Let me take this one step further: the next internet is going to know who else is in the room when the TV gets turned on; it is going to take all of this information into account so it can deliver a relevant experience from the jump. The father in the room with his 10 year old daughter at 7pm is going to get a different experience than when the father is in the room by himself at 7am.
This is why presence is the next frontier in connectivity. The people in a room with a device contain enough information to transform its functionality into a deeply personalized, relevant experience. The next internet is a seamless integration of technology that is marrying physical and digital worlds that is just starting to take shape.
This shift towards presence-based connectivity represents a broader trend in technology, where the focus is on creating experiences that are not only personalized but also deeply ingrained in the rhythm of our homes.
The New Internet Will Look Very Familiar
Editor’s note: We’ve heard – and promoted – our fair share of sensational takes about the next internet, so it is with a special sense of duty that we offer this push-back. This perspective comes from a technology executive who was very interested in splashing cold water on the revolutionary framing of the future internet. Stay tuned for a counter-take.
When we talk about the next internet, there is an assumption that the new thing will be a revolution against the current internet. But It’s not always about reinvention.
There is enough consumer data to suggest that people are not looking for a new internet as much as they are looking for more of what already exists. This is the data I’m talking about:
Screens still matter
The devices may change but consumers continue to watch some kind of screen for roughly 7 hours a day (TV + Phone).
The internet is for entertainment
70% of the bits that move through the internet are for entertainment (streaming TV, movies, sports, games, fitness).
Connectivity is steadily growing
Since 2019, the number of connected devices in the home has gone up 40%.
Let’s stop pretending that the future of the internet is going to look unrecognizable to the thing we’re using today. The internet consumer in 2025 is going to look like an internet superuser in 2019.
Kiss
Marry
& Kill
Taking stock of the internet before it totally changes
The Internet
From the editor: The ON_Discourse team dispatched to Austin for the 2024 SXSW with a dorm-room style ice-breaker question that generated much more introspection than we expected. More than that, this playful question dominated many of our events; one person’s answer inevitably sparked an impassioned response from someone else. If the internet as we know it is poised for a major change, should we be surprised by this reaction?
We are on the brink of a new internet. It looms over the horizon like a storm that we know will realign many of the conventions that define the web today. The changes to come are fundamentally unpredictable; we simply know they will be profound. As this storm approaches, many of our members are taking stock of the web itself; what they love, hate, and hope about it.
We tapped into this sentiment at SXSW this year with one of the most juvenile ice-breaker questions we’ve asked so far in our journey. What would you kiss, marry, and kill about the internet of the past, present, and future. The question drew an immediate reaction – maybe it was the tequila – that went surprisingly deep. We were just trying to have fun so we could get some raw perspective for this moment.
The following perspectives were overheard at SXSW:
What I would
Kiss
The features, apps, and conventions that briefly infatuate us. They seem so wonderful at first, but something about them fails to deliver.
Notifications
God they were amazing at first, but now it’s insane. They are interrupting everything in our lives and totally not worth it. — AI entrepreneur
DAOs
Idealistically what it represents is something that something that is built around a set of core values, shared values. People join and are a part of something because they all they all have something in common.
Search
Being able to search, I think it’s so powerful, but the format of this experience is not right. The way it works now is you enter this search term and get these 12 links which forces you to refine that search with 12 more links, right? I would want to get rid of that and have it be a more natural, predictive way of talking and searching. — Brand Executive
Flash
It was so fun and sexy and I miss it. — CEO
Algorithms
Algorithmic sharing of content. We sorted it and we’ve reached its logical extreme and it was a good run. We’re great at it; we dominated; we won. By winning, we lost. We lost because, literally, what will get shared is what will what will suck you in which is low quality content whenever you need it. — CEO
Outbrain
It sucked and was stupid, but it could have been amazing. — Brand Executive
What I would
Marry
The long-term opportunities and features that showcase the best of what the internet can offer end-users, brands, and platforms. This is way bigger than infatuation; this is love.
Online Gaming
I think gaming will combine movies and storytelling – big narration – that is going to be really interesting. Then you can actually kind of be a part of it. And with that comes all that personalization that creates your flavor of that. It’s going to be huge. — AI entrepreneur
As a productivity tool that supports what we do at a professional level, I think it’s phenomenal. And a social network that seems to have maintained a level of positivity that doesn’t exist elsewhere. — Famous podcaster
Spatial Computing
I believe it’s in it for the long term. It’s not just flashy and sexy right now, though it is. But it will be transformative and here for a long time and continue to evolve and get better like any good marriage. — CEO
Blockchain
We are selling it wrong; this is not meant to be a front-end benefit. No one needs to know what’s even there. But I think it will underpin the next internet. I’m thinking about the fediverse side stuff and the decentralization of our social networks for example, or being able to move your identity wherever you want. I get so excited by tokens and authenticity. — Brand executive
Blockchain (again)
It is the most boring thing I could possibly say. But I actually do believe that blockchain as an identity-based solution will change the way we use the internet forever. — CMO
Home Pages
They are still one of the most overlooked pieces of the internet. Don’t sleep on the value of a really good home page, no matter what everyone tells you about side door entries. — Brand Executvie
What I would
Kill
Do we need to explain this one any further?
iMessage
Two reasons: one, monopolistic dominance over any other potential competing products; and two, because the user experience just fucking sucks, and a company with $400 billion in cash on hand that cannot in any way innovate around making something that they have a non monopoly over better is very risky. This is one of the most frustrating things about Apple to me and I love that company. — Founder
SmartPhones
iPhone neck and other issues with this stupid screen we keep in front of our faces like that. — Founder
SmartPhones (again)
Its days are numbered so I’m just getting it over with. — CEO
Social Media
I would kill it in the way that it represents a fake life. Yep. Right. So this whole story of ‘I’m living my best life and everyone is living a better life than me.’ Right? I would kill that party. — Brand executive
Fortnight
They are creating unchecked environments for minors and kids to engage in behaviors that are resulting in mental health and socially unhealthy behaviors and actions. — CMO
Ad-Funded Content
I think that the main problem with the internet today is that it’s fully advertising-funded, right? With only a few exceptions. And the problem with advertising-funded means that we don’t give a fuck about the quality of the content. — CEO
The Future of Media is Personal
A lot more content is coming
From the editor: Is digital media doomed? The following perspective comes from a guest who was an executive at one of the biggest newsrooms in the world. It builds off another point we overheard about how news should be thought of as a service, not a product. This kind of thinking can transform news consumption into a personalized experience.
I pay for ESPN+. This subscription gets me access to countless streams that have no value to me at all. The only reason I pay is to access my team’s games. Are you telling me this kind of subscription model is a good thing? We are on the brink of a new kind of subscriber relationship that will be powered by AI and proprietary data.
We have to stop thinking about AI as if it is a replacement technology. AI is the ultimate enabler.
The first point is about the data. I have been paying ESPN directly for six years. They have collected data on my team & league affinities, watching preferences, and triggers. This data is not big enough to launch an ESPN LLM, but that does not matter; there are other ways to integrate smaller sets of proprietary data into another platform’s LLM. The bottom line is that ESPN can finally have access to the enabling technology that can ultimately deliver a true personalized experience. I don’t think we know yet how amazing this experience will be. It is going to be worth the money.
We have to stop thinking about AI as if it is a replacement technology. AI is the ultimate enabler. Media brands need to embrace the way this tech can foster novel content experiences. Doing so will revolutionize the relationships audiences have with their media brands. I am typically a pessimist when I think about the future of the internet, but this scenario gets me legitimately inspired.
READ MORE
Is Media Doomed?
The internet is mutating. Search queries are being replaced by prompts, and search results are turning into direct information. The web has always been perceived as an interconnected network of sites, but this new internet feels more like a magic mirror: prompt and you shall receive. Does this transition mean media is doomed?
AI Mediocrity is Coming
This is the era of exponential content
Bias is a moat against AI mediocrity
Develop a stronger point of view
News is a service, not a product
This mindset can unlock AI utility in newsrooms.
The future of media is personal
A lot more content is coming
Leverage your data
Available to read soon
Incumbents have an advantage
Available to read soon
AI is not the biggest threat to news
Available to read soon
News Is a Service, Not a Product
This mindset can unlock AI utility in newsrooms.
From the editor: Is digital media doomed? The following perspective comes from a guest who was an executive at one of the biggest newsrooms in the world. It reframes the way generative AI is often blamed for contaminating content with mediocre output. What if the focus was on the journalism and not the content?
Newsroom conversations about AI are confined by the wrong mindset. News is a service, not a product. In order to understand why this matters, let me break it down.
If news is a product, then the ultimate byproduct is the article. This mindset dictates how ads are bought, sold, and placed on the real-estate of the page. Additionally, the traffic to that page determines the ultimate value of the coverage for the bottom line. Publishers will spend resources designing the packaging and promotion of that content. Awards will be set up to honor the best designs. Careers will be made out of this whole arrangement. And while it works for many of the actors involved, it is missing one key element: the audience. For the most part, the youngest generation in the professional world are not finding any of this relevant.
It is me taking you out and making you tell me something you don’t want to tell.
This is because news is not a product; we got that wrong. News is a service.
As someone just said at this table, the role of the journalist is not to produce articles. “It is me taking you out and making you tell me something you don’t want to tell.” The format of the information is irrelevant to the audience; the point of thinking this as a service is translating the relevant information into a context that serves that audience member. The act of journalism is hard to automate, but AI can help in converting facts into formats that do a better job of delivering value.
AI should be exciting to newsrooms.This technology can translate complex findings into personalized packages at scale. We are at the precipice of a new era of media and all we have to do is understand what we’re doing here and why. The article is not the point.
READ MORE
Is Media Doomed?
The internet is mutating. Search queries are being replaced by prompts, and search results are turning into direct information. The web has always been perceived as an interconnected network of sites, but this new internet feels more like a magic mirror: prompt and you shall receive. Does this transition mean media is doomed?
AI Mediocrity is Coming
This is the era of exponential content
Bias is a moat against AI mediocrity
Develop a stronger point of view
News is a service, not a product
This mindset can unlock AI utility in newsrooms.
The future of media is personal
A lot more content is coming
Leverage your data
Available to read soon
Incumbents have an advantage
Available to read soon
AI is not the biggest threat to news
Available to read soon
AI Mediocrity is Coming
This is the era of exponential content
Overheard at ON_Discourse
From the editor: Is digital media doomed? The disruptive forces of generative AI are not only changing end-user experiences, they are changing the economic model of all media. The following perspectives come from a dialogue between two executives from global newsrooms.
So far, most newsrooms are generally using AI on the production side. This seems to be the most common expectation for how AI is going to infiltrate digital media. It should come as no surprise that the results so far have been a humiliating disaster. Nevertheless, the public scrutiny that came from these failures will not slow this trend. More AI-generated content is coming to newsrooms and out into your own personal content feeds. The problem is: the more content it generates, the more mediocre it will get.
AI is exponential. Exponents are tricky. AI has proven that it’s really good at creating more content — not good content — just more. But at a certain point there is too much to be processed, even by AI. What happens next?
This will not be a problem for many popular media formats and subjects. Audiences know how to accept “good-enough” content in the right context. Overall I think we’re fine with mediocrity. Media brands run by organizations that are focused solely on short-term earnings cycles will bank on this trend.
READ MORE
Is Media Doomed?
The internet is mutating. Search queries are being replaced by prompts, and search results are turning into direct information. The web has always been perceived as an interconnected network of sites, but this new internet feels more like a magic mirror: prompt and you shall receive. Does this transition mean media is doomed?
AI Mediocrity is Coming
This is the era of exponential content
Bias is a moat against AI mediocrity
Develop a stronger point of view
News is a service, not a product
This mindset can unlock AI utility in newsrooms.
The future of media is personal
A lot more content is coming
Leverage your data
Available to read soon
Incumbents have an advantage
Available to read soon
AI is not the biggest threat to news
Available to read soon
Bias is a moat against AI
Mediocrity
Develop a stronger point of view
Overheard at ON_Discourse
From the editor: AI-generated content is a cost-saving tool that serves no other purpose. One theme that popped up in our events was the power of a point of view. One of our guests welcomed the rise of mediocre content as a way for legacy brands to stay relevant in a saturated media environment. Can a stronger bias save legacy brands from extinction?
The solution to AI-generated content is a strong point of view. We need to bring bias back to newsrooms.
All of the brands that are experimenting with AI-generated content are dying. Sports Illustrated and the Gannett newspaper titles carry legacy brand value with older generational segments, driving short term marginal revenue. At the end of the day, they will eventually go the way of Life Magazine. In that way, it makes business-sense for the leaders to cut costs on content production. But those brands are dying and they don’t matter to this discussion. Let’s talk about the next generation of media.
If AI content is mediocre and generic, their content should be specific and infused with a strong point of view. Bring bias back!
I care about the media brands that have long-term goals that require growing an audience. These brands should be paying attention to the AI-generated content trend as a way to differentiate themselves with their target audience. If AI content is mediocre and generic, their content should be specific and infused with a strong point of view. Bring bias back!
Media bias is unnecessarily controversial in the US. It is easier in many cases for a newsroom to favor an unbiased product than to acknowledge the sentiments that exist within the newsroom and among its audience. This dynamic creates a barrier between media brands and younger generations. It is widely known in consumer research that younger consumers in their 20s, 30s, early 40s wanted brands to stand for something. It is no surprise, then, that unbiased media is not relevant to the next generation.
Let’s let go of outdated expectations about bias and lean into our differences.
That’s not good
An innovative idea that’s too ahead of its time
From the editor: This perspective emerged out of a virtual event after the launch of the Vision Pro. A member was broadcasting into our Zoom call as their ethereal Apple persona before crashing out of the session. This sparked a member debate about which device the Vision Pro more closely resembles. We follow Chatham House rules, so we do not attribute perspectives without authorization.
In 1993, Apple released the Newton, the world’s first personal digital assistant (PDA). It was ugly, buggy, and expensive, and it also included a non-functioning stylus that frequently got misplaced. Does any of this sound familiar to you?
The Newton deserves a lot of credit. It invented a new category of computing for mobile devices. Many of the initial ideas for personal note taking and contact management persist in our smartphones today. To put it another way, the Newton was analogous to the Velvet Underground: not popular, but influential. At the same time, its failures were comical.
I am not the only one to say this. Beeple recently made the same comparison. So what does this mean for Apple and the Vision Pro?
The Newton was analogous to the Velvet Underground: not popular, but influential.
Apple is now just another player in the VR void. And so they have to join Meta, Pico, and all the other brands in their search for a use-case that will make headset computing mainstream. Let me put it another way: the Vision Pro did not change the VR industry. I don’t care how much they try to use the word spatial, the Vision Pro is a conventional VR device that is just heavier and more expensive.
Apple’s brand is aspirational, luxurious, and innovative. These attributes were earned by the spectacular attention to detail, design, and product-market fit that define every other product in their ecosystem. The high standards that Apple has traditionally set for itself have usually come with hard decisions that ultimately serve the customer. Upon his return in 1997, one of the first things Steve Jobs did was kill the Newton product line. They went back to the drawing board and ultimately came back with the most successful piece of hardware in the history of digital technology.
Does any of that sound familiar to you?
That is the wrong comparison
The Vision Pro is neither the iPhone or the Newton. You have to think bigger.
From the editor: We are noticing that this device is prompting very strong contrarian discourse. In this case, a member is expressing a direct pushback against the Newton comparison. We follow Chatham House rules, so we do not attribute perspectives without authorization.
Is the Vision Pro the next Newton or iPhone? I urge you not to take the bait and condense this product launch into a specious binary. The company that built and launched the Newton might share a name, but it has no relationship to the Apple that exists today. Let me put it bluntly: they might not have landed on a use-case yet, but Apple always wins.
It is possible that the experience of the Newton fundamentally changed how Apple operates because since that launch, Apple has never again been first to market with a product. This is because the first to market is statistically the worst option. The iPhone was not the first internet-powered mobile phone. The Apple Watch was not the first smart watch. And the Apple Vision Pro is not the first headset device. I think we can all agree that those products are doing quite well. The Apple Watch is outselling all other watches in the world and the iPhone, well, it also succeeded.
If we are going to do a comparison, then we have to look to more recent Apple history. The Apple Watch and Apple TV are closer analogues. Both of those products and platforms launched without landing on a clear value-proposition and therefore with a longer adoption curve. They have the capital, brand, customer base, and time to figure these things out.
I’ll say it again: Apple always wins.
Apple Flubbed the Vision Pro Launch
Lost opportunity
The launch of the Vision Pro made me miss Steve Jobs
From the editor: The initial skepticism of the Vision Pro prompted many of our members to question Apple’s marketing strategy. Here is a collection of takes from a member at a recent virtual event who scrutinized the potential of this contentious product. We follow Chatham House rules, so we do not attribute perspectives without authorization.
Something struck me about the launch of the Apple Vision Pro. The whole process felt flat as if Apple was releasing a minor upgrade to an existing unit and not a revolutionary new piece of hardware. This was released more like the original Apple Watch, as if it were a fashion accessory that augmented the iPhone. It made me realize that this is the first major hardware release in the post-Jobs era. Does this explain the flat release? Is Apple any good at launching revolutionary products anymore? Does it matter?
Steve Jobs always marketed around clear and accessible customer use cases. When I saw “1000 songs in your pocket”, I immediately got the iPod (conceptually and commercially). The same can be said about the iPhone; this single device combined the iPod, phone, and mobile web. Additionally, the deliberately designed white phone contrasted mightily against the all-black devices that dominated the sector. Early adopters signaled their association with the Apple brand just by walking around. The little white brick made them look cool, which made other people want to buy one. The Vision Pro does not offer any of those benefits.
I’ve noticed that Apple has in-housed the marketing for the Vision Pro. This has resulted in unflattering 3D renders of the device with ineffective demonstrations of use cases. As a result, they haven’t made me want to buy one and I spend a lot of money on random shit I don’t need.
The marketing was a flub, but this is still Apple and I fully expect future releases of the Vision Pro to go mainstream. Nevertheless, we are witnessing a fascinating new kind of computing experience get released without any imagination or spark. It’s disappointing and will result in a longer arc on the inevitable adoption curve.
XR will now forever be known as Spatial
This was no flub. Apple’s launch defined a new product category from scratch.
From the editor: We shared the critiques of Apple’s marketing with another member who has spent decades marketing with Apple. It turns out there are alternative ways to interpret Apple’s marketing strategy. We follow Chatham House rules, so we do not attribute perspectives without authorization.
Apple crushed the Vision Pro launch and I can prove it. The fact that we’re all using the word Spatial is the only evidence I need to prove that Apple is, once again, leading the conversation about new technology. No matter how big Apple gets and how premium its prices are, it will always be a challenger brand. In this case, Apple challenged and redefined the very nature of immersive video.
Apple deliberately avoided calling the Vision Pro an XR device, and as expected, the world followed. To call this device XR would follow the conventions set by the Meta Quest. Look at its marketing page: this device is built for video games. It is a toy. Apple had bigger intentions.
Apple positioned the Vision Pro around spatial experiences. This is a new concept that has yet to define a specific use case. Spatial tech can facilitate premium remote work experiences. It can catalyze exclusive new immersive video formats. It can also power a new kind of emotional content format: a sort of living memory. In its product launch, we saw Apple create an opportunity rather than box itself in as a video game player.
The idea that Apple hasn’t specified a use case is not the flaw you think it is; it is more of a flex. Apple has the resources, capital, and capability to launch this product and then figure it out. In your argument, you referred to the Apple Watch and how it was originally marketed as a fashion accessory. That is a fair point, but it is deliberately missing the coda. The initial product launch focused on fashion until health tech took over. Once that use case became clear to Apple, they marketed heavily around that. As a result, this Apple Watch is now the biggest-selling watch on the planet. To put it another way: Apple always figures it out.
In the end, Apple always wins.
Four Things Spatial Needs to Become Legitimate
Free advice
The potential of spatial video is meaningless without scale
From the editor: Many of our members are excited by the Vision Pro. They are not deterred by the flawed form factor at all, and are instead focusing on the use-cases. One of our members recently laid out a roadmap for growth that has nothing to do with hardware fixes. This is a Chatham House recreation of a member’s perspective.
This post was written by a human and narrated by an AI-generated voice. (powered by Wondercraft.ai).
0:00
/
0:00
The Vision pro is ugly and expensive and buggy and it is going to make the internet way more interesting. The biggest challenge that this product faces is not the shitty keyboard experience or the weight on your face, nor is it the weird battery pack; it is the lack of scale. The Vision Pro needs scale to meet its destiny. Here are four steps that can catapult this product into the mainstream.
1
Subsidize Cost / Reinforce Use-Case
Find a partner that can subsidize the ridiculous retail price. Apple already gets credit for pioneering this strategy to make the iPhone more accessible to customers. The Vision Pro can partner with entertainment providers (Netflix?) or remote work platforms (Zoom?) to make it easier to access this device. The right partner not only reduces the price but it also reinforces the use-cases for this device. Netflix as a partner could pair this device with a new premium spatial video offering that includes exclusive access to this new content. Additionally, if Zoom were a partner, you can imagine remote work getting a significant boost.
2
Elevate Remote Work into a Premium Experience
Speaking of remote work: the Meta Quest made a half-hearted attempt to capture remote work demand but failed. It is inconceivable that professional employees would want to work in a cartoonishly designed metaverse.
Meta’s failure leaves an untapped white-space in the world of remote work. Zoom interfaces and Slack channels have not noticeably improved since the pandemic. As a result we are seeing more companies try to force employees back into the office. Despite all of this, remote work is not going away. The Vision Pro has the opportunity to enable premium collaborative experiences by converting a pen on a desk into a virtual object that can legibly draw on a digital whiteboard. Eventually the economics of this experience are going to drive mass adoption. As AI continues to rapidly diminish headcounts and management structure, employers will start to consider how much money an office, a desk, a chair costs compared to this device.
3
Leverage Mass Cultural Phenomena
The Vision Pro is driving a new kind of AV format that is undeniably riveting. Spatial video is not just a screen on your face; it is an emotional experience. The original Vision Pro includes a spatial video of Alicia Keys in the studio and it is an absolutely mesmerizing experience. The viewer is no longer a viewer, but a participant in an intimate setting with the musician. You are next to her at the piano, feeling her presence as you are hearing her perform. Alicia Keys is a magnificent star, but imagine this experience at a higher scale. If Alicia Keys has the star power of the sun, Taylor Swift is a galaxy. Her Eras Tour film already broke records in conventional theaters. What will her fans do if they can experience her presence with a fully immersive and personal movie theater experience? What if this experience is offered to die-hard football fans or NBA fans? How much would they pay for premium access to courtside seats from their own couch?
4
Tap into the Allure of Adult Content
This point should not be taken as an endorsement of porn, just an acknowledgement of its power to persuade the population to upgrade their personal tech. The emotional, sensory experience of spatial video is going to be irresistible to many consumers with expendable income. The moments in between intimate viewing are going to drive these users to get more value out of their device than their late-night ribaldry.
For the Vision Pro, scale is not necessarily focused on revenue alone; it’s about culture. Scale converts our collective creativity into new ways to use technology to shape culture. The iPhone is an example of this: there are over 2 million apps in the app store, yet the average iPhone owner frequently uses only 9 apps. You need scale to test out and identify what those final 9 apps could be. The iPhone, after all, is the standard bearer for the modern mobile experience. The Vision Pro has the potential to define the same thing for XR.
This product is going to change the way people consume media which will influence the way media is created. We should all be excited about this future. I have seen what the first Vision Pro can do – bugs and all – and I am still so fucking excited.