By now, you’ve probably heard all about Apple Vision Pro, the iPhone maker’s $3,500 headset to be released next year.

With its headset, Apple is once again walking a well-trodden path. From the original Google Glass a decade ago, to Microsoft’s HoloLens in 2016, to Meta’s $1,500 Quest Pro last year, there have been many attempts by Big Tech to make smart goggles happen.

It’s the payoff for years of teases from CEO Tim Cook about Apple’s big play in augmented reality (AR), the technology overlaying digital imagery atop the real world.

Leaders like Cook and Mark Zuckerberg have over the years repeatedly said that they see AR as one day supplanting the smartphone, raising the stakes for the future of the technology. Whoever nails the AR revolution stands to become the de facto hub for the next wave of computing.

Yet the headset revolution has not happened, at least not in anything resembling the mainstream. Generally speaking, they cost too much, do too little for the price, face tough technical limitations, and ultimately make anybody who wears them look like—for lack of a better phrase—a complete goober. Google and Microsoft have both hit turbulence with their respective augmented reality strategies, through winding sagas too long to recount here.

Still, it’s rarely wise to bet against Apple, given its track record of entering a market late with products like the iPod and iPhone, and still managing to redefine an entire category. The general industry consensus is that if Apple can’t do it, nobody can.

There’s a “but” here. But Apple has rarely entered a market where there’s so little perceived demand; it’s not clear who exactly is calling for a headset like this. And no matter how impressive the technology, $3,500 is a lot to ask, especially during a time of rising inflation and economic uncertainty.

And so, we have to wonder. If anyone can pull this off, it’s Apple, sure. But…what if it can’t? The likeliest answer is a poisoned well for smart glasses, and a new reality that may not be pleasant for rivals—especially Zuck.

Apple’s victory is far from assured

Augmented reality goggles are a key part of the metaverse, the immersive digital universe that leaders like Zuckerberg say is the next iteration of the modern internet. The idea is that AR can combine those two worlds, bringing digital art, architecture, and people to the physical streets and stores in your real-world field of vision.

Over the years, this has gone from science fiction to something tantalizingly close to practical. The problem is that the headsets that have hit the market are almost always too expensive for a product that mostly just does things your smartphone camera already can. The Verge called the recent $1,500 Meta Quest Pro “a cutting-edge headset looking for an audience.”

The ultimate, pie-in-the-sky goal of this whole line of technological inquiry is a headset no more cumbersome than a pair of normal eyeglasses that projects immersive digital worlds around the wearer. The reality for now though are beefy, helmet-like contraptions with limited battery life.

While Apple has carefully avoided using the word “metaverse,” the Vision Pro is no different. Those who have had the chance to try a preliminary version of the device say that the technology is impressive, with lots of the technical and stylistic flourishes you’d expect from a premium Apple product.

It is, in other words, shaping up to be the best AR product yet—but one that’s still subject to so many of the limitations of its forebears, including a two-hour battery life and a design that still screams “nerd alert.”

Plus, the Meta Quest Pro doesn’t seem to have exactly been a sales sensation; Apple is asking for more than double that device’s sticker price. That’s going to be a tough pill to swallow for many, no matter how impressive the product.

What it adds up to is that Apple is facing some serious challenges in a still unproven niche. The company is making smart bets with an exciting product, but it may not be enough.

If Apple can’t do it, can anyone?

Apple’s position as the de facto trendsetter in consumer technology can prove to be a double-edged sword.

If Apple pulls this off, Cook’s legacy as chief executive will be secure, and the Vision Pro will go down in history as a pivotal moment for the industry. That rising tide will lift many boats, as Zuckerberg’s big metaverse bet suddenly looks vindicated, and investors scramble to find additional ways to cash in on Apple’s success.

If Apple doesn’t pull it off, though—if the device gets bad reviews; if customers don’t bite; if developers decide not to bring apps to the platform—it will poison the well for anybody and everybody working on similar technology, for at least some time. Those same investors will likely punish any company that looks to follow in Apple’s footsteps in this regard. After all, if Apple can’t make it work, who can?

It probably wouldn’t kill the whole endeavor outright. The sci-fi idea of smart goggles that bring the boring old real world to digital life is too deeply ingrained in Silicon Valley and beyond. It would, however, make for at least another decade before we saw another serious attempt at Apple’s level to crack the market. The budding augmented reality space would enter the dreaded deep freeze of a tech “winter.”

That would be bad news for startups like Magic Leap, which offers its own set of AR goggles. It would be worse news for Meta, which has plowed tens of billions of dollars into its Reality Labs unit, responsible for its virtual and augmented reality products.

Wall Street is already uncertain of Zuckerberg’s metaverse strategy. A world in which Apple tried much the same thing and fell short would only exacerbate Wall Street’s skepticism, giving ammunition to the bears at a time when bulls are needed.

All of that said, we’ll only see that scenario if Apple and the Vision Pro fall short. So while Cook and Zuck haven’t always seen eye-to-eye over the years, perhaps Meta should be rooting for Apple to succeed here.