Curious, have you personally used or reviewed an AVP?
I don't expect it to compete with a $150K+ Augmedics surgical system. But from trusted reviewers (such as Marquez Brownlee) reporting pros and cons, in my opinion it appears AVP has a bright future in the AR world. Latency is 12 mSec, corresponding to its refresh rate of 90 Hz.
There are a lot of use applications where the current AVP will make a great AR tool for a variety of disciplines. Apple knows what its doing.
Also... One must remember this is a first generation device for Apple. From reading technical papers submitted at SIGGRAPH, glasses are not that far away. You can bet Apple is vigorously pursuing that for a future generation.
No I haven't used it in person, but have read enough trusted reviews to get the point that it's not simulating reality anywhere near as well as the human eye can, whether it's latency, fov, color gamut, or other issues which have been brought up. Certainly it most likely does this the best out of any other VR headset, but still not close to human vision. But of course I will temper that with myself not having tried it out. Although some things are obviously not going to change, like having 1.4lbs strapped to the front of your head, peripheral vision, comfort, etc, similar to the other VR headsets I've tried.
AR for industrialized applications may be an avenue to profit, although I will have to see it to believe it, even industrial applications still have to wear this monstrosity. Surgeons, architects, etc still have to have it on for hours at a time. Sure they can put it aside, but time is money and if you aren't working you aren't making it. AR for the mass market consumer, I don't think so, at least how I have it envisioned, and I can totally respect if your vision of AR isn't the same. Personally my vision of AR is walking around and getting an information overlay of what I'm looking at, travel directions, weather, restaurant menus and reviews, store sales, contact information, hazards, etc. It doesn't mean those are the only uses, just the ones I would love to have in a set of glasses, but could care less about in a VR headset which I would only wear for very short periods of time with specialized work. Even simply having a huge screen that is travel friendly isn't well implemented, only one monitor for Mac output and you can't connect non Apple devices.
I totally get that it's a first gen product, even ignoring some of the competing hardware which is actually smaller and much more compact/cheaper. But devs still kind of need to know where to go with it, and VR hardware has been around for a while (as has passthrough) and it's not like we've seen anything other than games really sell these devices. I mean we all knew AR/VR would take off when these units approached the size of glasses. You have to stop looking at those voicing valid criticisms as not having any vision of the future, trust me I've been heavily interested in AR/VR ever since Lucky Palmer first announced the original Oculus hardware. Again, everyone keeps saying the same "cut them a break it's the first gen" stuff, but when I see other companies making nicer hardware (I'll save that until that other hardware actually gets reviewed though) it makes me wonder what Apple is thinking.