Apple CEO Tim Cook Compares Vision Pro 'Moment' to iPhone and Mac

[citysnaps]

VR headsets with passthrough have been around for a long time now, yet we don't see them taking over any industries. Apple has released a product with much higher specs and much better passthrough, I'll give them that, so maybe that's what's needed to push the market in that direction. Although personally I doubt it, at least for this round, lots of reviews which note the less than perfect implemetation from reduced FOV, to color gamut, latency, and a myriad of other factors which make this too far removed from just using your eyes. I totally get where you are coming from, and don't disagree in the least, it's just going to take many more iterations and a much lighter, more ergonomic package, and for mass market appeal it needs to be cheaper.

My hope is that Apple spurs on competitors, elevating the entire market segment just like they have done with smartphones and tablets. You can already see Meta pivoting as they announced the ability to see spatial video and use pinch gestures on the Quest 3. I'm sure they are busy re-designing the Quest 4 and Quest Pro 2 now that they see what Apple has released. But at the same time I really really hope many of these companies do NOT follow the VP design, there are already AR/VR headsets with pretty similar specs which are much smaller, lighter, and more ergonomic available today so we know the technology is there. So vice versa, I also hope competetion spurs Apple to do better then the monstrosity they released.

I think that's because there aren't many "industries" that VR can take over; which I view as for mostly entertainment.

Apple going deep on AR is totally different. It's just a matter of time for Apple and developers (now that they can purchase an AVP for development) to write the applications; a dozen or two potential use cases that I've written about here in the past. Those just scratched the surface - there are far more.

It's kind of like when Apple entered the smartphone market. There were other smart phones available at the time from Motorola, Ericsson, Nokia (referred to as MEN in the industry), etc. Apple released iPhone with far more useful functionality and features, and the rest is history. If Apple had instead released an iPhone that merely did the same functions as those from MEN, the iPhone would not have been competitive, and for sure would have failed.

 

[bgillander]

I think it's worth remembering that come 2016, LG had pretty much eliminated the technical foibles of 3DTV with their passive 4K OLED sets. By then, the content was also by-and-large stunning, but 3DTV still crashed and burned because a) the damage was already done after years of horrible content on bad hardware, and b) too many people didn't want to wear glasses of any description never mind a giant cyborg helmet.

Very true, but you left out my favourite… the bitter taste that many of us early 3d adopters had from the “vendor exclusive bundles” for titles at the beginning. I had to buy a Panasonic player if I wanted Avatar, Samsung if I wanted Shrek… it was like they thought it was so good that they couldn’t possibly kill it, no matter how much they abused the customer. I hear similar complaints here, however this seems customer friendly by comparison to me. Considering I never minded the 3d glasses, but find headsets somewhat cumbersome, this always seemed like a hard item to sell to the average person, but I guess time will tell.

 

[bgillander]

Tim, if you wanted this to be another iPhone moment, you should have priced it as such.

It is funny to see the comments here that make it sound like absolutely no one thought the iPhone was overpriced when it was first released.

The MacRumors thread from then is a fun read:

Apple Announces The iPhone

It'll be interesting to look back on this thread in a few years, much like we do today with the famous Thread #500, and see how people's gut reactions match up with reality.

forums.macrumors.com

 

[turbineseaplane]

It is funny to see the comments here that make it sound like absolutely no one thought the iPhone was overpriced when it was first released.

The MacRumors thread from then is a fun read:

Apple Announces The iPhone

It'll be interesting to look back on this thread in a few years, much like we do today with the famous Thread #500, and see how people's gut reactions match up with reality.

forums.macrumors.com

Folks may have thought it was overpriced, but not by 5-10x

 

[reyesmac]

I heard long ago about an idea Apple had to bundle several devices together that gave you the vision experience but ended up costing around $4000. Basically a dumb headset that you must pair with a phone or computer to get the functionality. Now seeing what they did I like that idea more. If Apple made an Apple TV sized computer you could pair a cheap vision headset to as well as your phone, it would do all the Vision Pro does now but you would also have purchased devices you can keep using when you are not using the headset. I think they ditched the idea because they didnt want any backwards compatibility with your old devices, they wanted you to buy only new devices bundled together to get the experience. Greed will cost you every time. Now they have a device for two kinds of people, the kind that buy it and rarely use it and the ones that are alone and use it too much but don't really do anything useful with it. If it was a bundle of three separate devices you couldn't help but use it in some capacity all the time. The Mac part for work, the phone for mobility and the headset for home recreation. Apple can do this but they rather find ways to increase their entry prices for new devices.

 

[Rafterman]

No way in hell those V2 price jump!

I don't think it will go up, but I don't see it coming down, unless they make a less-spec'ed version.

 

[turbineseaplane]

@reyesmac

Along the lines of your post, it's always driven me nuts that Apple won't put a few more Apps on the AppleTV.

Add even just Safari and pair with a BT KB/Mouse and you have a dirt cheap but totally serviceable computer for a LOT of people who just need the web. I have some older relatives that would be ALL over this and instead I have them on Windows NUCs.

But Apple doesn't do it because ... "why"?
That'd be a great product but it's 1/10th the cost of a Mac .. or at least only 1/2 the cost of an entry level iPad.

They've really deviated from caring enough about what is actually a great product for their customers.
It's all just a money machine now.

 

[Sevendaymelee]

Yeah. Right. I'm so sure that everyone, in five years time, is going to be walking around in public with these things strapped to their heads. Sure. Okay, Tim. Whatever...

 

[onenorth]

That's not fully accurate, not all shareholders want instant gratification. One of the people I follow the most is Warren Buffet, who's mantra is to look at the fundamentals of a company including what they offer and why. I invest a lot into Apple stock precisely because it's one of Buffet's favorites, and I think they still have plenty of reasons why their stock is a buy even if the VP fails (which I don't think it will, it will just take several years). But in that same vein I think it's important to look at the "fundamentals" of the VP's business plan.

The plan is to make it a success. Time will tell. Yet a lot of pundits here are declaring it dead already and calling Tim Cook a failure. Already! That, to me, seems to be an unreasonable position to take.

Give it some time and then we can assess whether the plan is working. Maybe not five years, but definitely more than five days. All I'm saying is that I can't be second-guessing all of these companies and their fundamentals. They are doing their own things, for better or for worse, and there will be ups and downs, naturally. Isn't everyone concerned that iPhone has peaked? And now they want Apple to hit another homerun. It's a really big ask IMHO.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Isn't everyone concerned that iPhone has peaked? And now they want Apple to hit another homerun.

I just want some singles and doubles

I'd like some more choice in the iPhone sizes/features

I'd like an updated iPad Mini

I'd like Cellular on Mac Laptops (as an option)

I'd like FaceID on Macs

I'd like better battery life on the Watch

(I could go on but I won't)


I really don't want home runs, but base hits and driving in runs

 

[NEPOBABY]

The plan is to make it a success. Time will tell. Yet a lot of pundits here are declaring it dead already

It's not going to die. It's just not going to be this mega world changing thing that replaces all your devices like some insane lonely nerds and YouTube clickbaiters think. Actually I doubt they believe it themselves.

 

[onenorth]

I just want some singles and doubles

I'd like some more choice in the iPhone sizes/features

I'd like an updated iPad Mini

I'd like Cellular on Mac Laptops (as an option)

I'd like FaceID on Macs

I'd like better battery life on the Watch

(I could go on but I won't)


I really don't want home runs, but base hits and driving in runs

Singles and doubles don't drive the stock price very much, and anyway that's not the point of this thread. This tread is about Tim Cook's pronouncement that Vision Pro is a new "moment" for the company. From my perspective, it's marketing hype and nothing more or less. From the perspective of many commenters here, it is an unforgivable violation of the Steve Jobs' legacy, or something portending the end times for Apple. Gloom and doom.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Singles and doubles don't drive the stock price very much

Sure they do -- if you drive in runs over time

That used to be "how to do it" -- not just "hyping and hoping" as they are doing now with AVP

 

[onenorth]

It's not going to die. It's just not going to be this mega world changing thing that replaces all your devices like some insane lonely nerds and YouTube clickbaiters think. Actually I doubt they believe it themselves.

It seems like an excuse to gang up on Apple in these forums. Maybe venting makes us all feel a little better.

Sure they do -- if you drive in runs over time

That used to be "how to do it" -- not just "hyping and hoping" as they are doing now with AVP

Putting FaceID on a Mac will not change the stock price one iota. None of these things you listed will either, even in combination. The stock price is driven by revenue, and revenue is driven by products and services at a large scale.

 

[turbineseaplane]

iPad can be anything you want it to be? This from the company that nerfed the orientation-lockable volume buttons so that after moving it from one location to another inside a folio or keyboard case, you quite literally have to guess which button does what if you're still playing an audiobook or podcast and need to adjust the volume.

You got me to LOL, I admit

I've had that issue (and it sucks)

 

[NEPOBABY]

It seems like an excuse to gang up on Apple in these forums. Maybe venting makes us all feel a little better.

Ganging up for or against a janky product is fine.

I'm happy to see people who believe weird and extreme things get criticized for being unrealistic.

How can anyone believe a headset will replace everything?

It's the same stupid idea that dog coin is going to replace all real money.

Its the same insane idea that webpages will be replaced with 3D Zuckerberg world.

It's the same silliness that all books will be replaced with ebooks.

It's divorced from reality.

Nothing gets completely replaced. Some ideas fail. Some things become successful and then die. The iPod was super successful and doesn't exist anymore, but Sony still sells a Walkman range.

 

[onenorth]

I'm hopeful that some Vision Pro tech (hardware and software) migrates to other products as it evolves, and that Vision Pro is a platform for future development (as opposed to what else, the iPhone?). I'm not sure how or where but I'm not in the camp that the Vision Pro is a worthless, dead end product.

People complain that Apple is not innovating and also complain about how Vision Pro is not innovative. Not sure what they are looking for but whatever it is, it's obviously not happening. That's what I meant by Tim Cook being in a no-win situation with the peanut gallery.

 

[onenorth]

The iPod was super successful and doesn't exist anymore, but Sony still sells a Walkman range.

This was unmistakably Apple. I think maybe we pine for another one of these "moments." It's a high bar though and the higher they go the harder they fall.

 

[UK-MacAddict]

Tim Cook is seriously deluded if he thinks the Vision Pro is on the same level as the Mac and iPhone.

Mac and iPhone introduced technology never seen before. Everything in the Vision Pro has be tried and done by Microsoft, Google and Meta over the last decade.

Call it Spatial Computing or whatever else it’s a VR/AR headset plain and simple. Doomed to failure. It’s cumbersome technology and nobody will want to sit for an extended period of time with that on their face, that’s the problem. For technology like this to go the distance it needs to be on a contact lens where the technology is completely out of the way for the user. Nobody is close to being able to do that so until then it’s a waste of money.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Tim Cook is seriously deluded if he thinks the Vision Pro is on the same level as the Mac and iPhone.

This whole thing is a hopeful attempt to create something new and big and hopefully juice their stock

I think he was hoping this would be "it" and he could retire on a high note.

Not happening Tim, sorry

 

[maxoakland]

This is Apple’s new Newton, really, isn’t it? A concept which the current level of viable consumer technology can’t do justice for a mainstream product, and won’t be able to for several years to come.

It's so hard to tell but it's definitely possible. The iPhone was just barely capable enough when it was released and it was released at a price that was way too high as well. Same as the original Macintosh.

Hard to say where Vision falls, but to me, personally, I don't find it exciting, interesting, or capable enough to pique my interest at all

 

[maxoakland]

It is funny to see the comments here that make it sound like absolutely no one thought the iPhone was overpriced when it was first released.

The MacRumors thread from then is a fun read:

Apple Announces The iPhone

It'll be interesting to look back on this thread in a few years, much like we do today with the famous Thread #500, and see how people's gut reactions match up with reality.

forums.macrumors.com

This is true AND at the same time, Apple reduced the price to something a lot more reasonable very quickly. There was also the factor that AT&T gave a lot of people a basically free iPhone because of carrier lock-in contracts

So it's really not the same situation

 

[gentleman00]

Apple CEO Tim Cook today sent out a memo to employees, thanking them for their work on the Apple Vision Pro headset that was introduced today. In the memo, which was shared by Bloomberg, Cook compared the Vision Pro to the Mac, iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch, and said that it is joining Apple's "pantheon of groundbreaking products" that have both "defined Apple" and "redefined technology as we know it."

Cook visited Apple Store Fifth Avenue in New York for the Vision Pro launch, and he said it was "incredible" to watch people try out the Vision Pro for the first time and see the "impossible become possible."

According to Cook, this is "just the beginning" of spatial computing and the impact that Apple will make with the Vision Pro. Apple believes that "incredible opportunities" are still ahead.

Cook also did a quick interview with Good Morning America this morning, where he further explained the impact he thinks the Vision Pro will have. "The iPhone introduced us to mobile computing, the Mac introduced us to personal computing, this is the first spatial computer," he said. "People are going to interact with it in different ways."

"A company only has a few of these," Cook continued. "Most companies have none. We've had the Mac, the iPod, the iPad, the iPhone, the Apple Watch, and now the Vision Pro. It's one of those moments."

On the price, Cook went on to explain that it's "tomorrow's technology today," and that it's packed with 5,000 patents. "We think we priced it for the right value today," said Cook.

The Apple Vision Pro is available at U.S. Apple Stores as of today, and some retail locations do have stock available for walk-in purchases. The device is priced starting at $3,500.

Article Link: Apple CEO Tim Cook Compares Vision Pro 'Moment' to iPhone and Mac

iPad, MacBooks, iPhones, and portable and flat devices. That’s why they have mass appeal. The Vision Pro is not. And, it is not cheap. You won’t see people taking the Vision Pro to a coffee shop to work on a writing project or do FaceTime. In a few years, the price will decline to $1999. Ithe device beyond the reach of the average consumer.

Apple CEO Tim Cook today sent out a memo to employees, thanking them for their work on the Apple Vision Pro headset that was introduced today. In the memo, which was shared by Bloomberg, Cook compared the Vision Pro to the Mac, iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch, and said that it is joining Apple's "pantheon of groundbreaking products" that have both "defined Apple" and "redefined technology as we know it."

Cook visited Apple Store Fifth Avenue in New York for the Vision Pro launch, and he said it was "incredible" to watch people try out the Vision Pro for the first time and see the "impossible become possible."

According to Cook, this is "just the beginning" of spatial computing and the impact that Apple will make with the Vision Pro. Apple believes that "incredible opportunities" are still ahead.

Cook also did a quick interview with Good Morning America this morning, where he further explained the impact he thinks the Vision Pro will have. "The iPhone introduced us to mobile computing, the Mac introduced us to personal computing, this is the first spatial computer," he said. "People are going to interact with it in different ways."

"A company only has a few of these," Cook continued. "Most companies have none. We've had the Mac, the iPod, the iPad, the iPhone, the Apple Watch, and now the Vision Pro. It's one of those moments."

On the price, Cook went on to explain that it's "tomorrow's technology today," and that it's packed with 5,000 patents. "We think we priced it for the right value today," said Cook.

The Apple Vision Pro is available at U.S. Apple Stores as of today, and some retail locations do have stock available for walk-in purchases. The device is priced starting at $3,500.

Article Link: Apple CEO Tim Cook Compares Vision Pro 'Moment' to iPhone and Mac

Portability will be a major limitations to this device. The success of iPads, iPhones, and MacBooks are in part due to them being flat and foldable (as in the case of MacBooks). This is a niche market device that will not have mass appeal unless the price is reduced. To $999. That will likely happen in a few years just like the original MacBook Air back in 2008.

 

[vipergts2207]

It is funny to see the comments here that make it sound like absolutely no one thought the iPhone was overpriced when it was first released.

The MacRumors thread from then is a fun read:

Apple Announces The iPhone

It'll be interesting to look back on this thread in a few years, much like we do today with the famous Thread #500, and see how people's gut reactions match up with reality.

forums.macrumors.com

Consider that Apple benchmarked the price of the iPhone against $300 smartphones and yeah, it was a little pricey. Now consider that the typical VR headset is around $500 and the AVP is way more expensive than that.

 

[d686546s]

It is funny to see the comments here that make it sound like absolutely no one thought the iPhone was overpriced when it was first released.

The MacRumors thread from then is a fun read:

Apple Announces The iPhone

It'll be interesting to look back on this thread in a few years, much like we do today with the famous Thread #500, and see how people's gut reactions match up with reality.

forums.macrumors.com

They dropped the price within 3 months of release by $200 to $399, so I reckon any pre-release complaints that the device was overpriced were justified.

The difference is that most people could afford the iPhone, even though it was comparably pricey. More devices in more people's hands created more hype, which in turn brought more developers to create more apps, which made the device even more desirable (and useful) to more people.

The AVP just isn't that. At $3.5k starting it's way out of reach for most people.

The iPhone moment didn't just happen because it was a cool device or because it was well made, but because people could actually buy and use them.