Apple Claims Vision Pro SDK Downloads Exceeded Expectations Amid Developer Lab Attendance Concerns

[jz0309]

And you assume all 26M can afford a Vision Pro? And that they'd even want one in the first place? Lol. More like 1% of that 10% might be interested...so a few hundred thousand units.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in giving you 90% of the adult population "prefers in person" events - that number is ridiculously high ...
and a few hundred thousand units in the first year - I'll call that success.
edit: and this was an example of "life events" only, so add all those other use cases --> Success

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Perhaps you will be able to record a 3D video while on that hike and then sell the experience to those with disabilities like the poster you were replying to who are unable to take that hike. Not everyone has the option that you do of physically traveling. I could see a market developing of immersive videos of various locations and experiences that would be watched by people who can’t take the trip or who are planning a trip and want to preview the experience.

Yes, look at the Peloton example. The bike never moves. It's always in the one spot in millions of owner's homes. People pay a fairly hefty subscription to virtualize rides all over the world, after paying a fairly hefty one-time cost to buy that hardware. If this is a family home, many/most probably take turns using it vs. buying 1 bike for every person.

Their "apps" is an experience via a smallish 2D screen, more like a super-sized tablet. And yet they pay and pay and pay to ride a bike usually alone that actually goes nowhere. Why do they do that? Because short of being able to take an actual bike to all of those locations all over the world to actually ride on those paths in person, this is the next best thing... for now.

I will not be a bit surprised to see a player like Peloton making a VR version of the same adventures so those with both the Peloton bike and a Vpro can even more immersively ride the same trails. Instead of staring down at a 2D window on that world, they can look all around them as they ride and see whatever they would see if they were actually there riding in all of those places. Those millions who have spent a LOT for a stationary bike and then continue to spend a LOT on monthly "software" in a subscription are probably not so difficult to motivate to spend a LOT on Vpro if it takes the experience to that "I feel like I'm actually there now" level.

All of this kind of thing becomes possible with Vpro. Too many of us seem to lack enough imagination to fully see the potential. This is NOT 3D TV redux (3D views through a 2D rectangle sitting out in front of us). This is an experience of being able to look all around us and see "there", wherever "there" happens to be.

There are all kinds of "software" business models that make a good amount of money with that limitation: consuming the Pay-Per-View event, the "whole season", the international event, etc. through a 2D "window" we call a television, tablet, phone or sometimes movie screen. This is more like Star Trek holodeck junior (or maybe junior junior)... not able to stimulate all 5 senses... but apparently effectively fooling the 2 (arguably) most important ones.

I'm surprised a "think different" crowd seems to struggle with how much of a leap this can be. Yes, the software must be created to deliver on the upside potential of the hardware but that's how all new leaps begin. Hopefully, the Pelotons, the Pay-per-view crowd, the many sports leagues around the world, the concert sellers, the show sellers, etc are all developing their "software" to take advantage of this opportunity, obviously from people with enough income to pay the one-time steep price of entry... just like millions have for a stationary bike, the mirror, etc.

 

[PlayUltimate]

They likely won't change the price of gen 1, but will make gen 2 cheaper.

Can't remember all of them, but the Macbook Air started out at about $1700 and later they eventually made and sold one for $999.

First Apple TV started at $299 and later the 2nd and 3rd gen at $99.

I mean rumors say they plan to produce less than 400'000 in 2024.... if they are not ready to produce at scale, they might as well charge as much for them as they can.

With the current hardware cost estimates i've seen (which is around $1600), my guess would be that they will eventually lower the prices to about $2500 once they produce a later version at scale. At which point it will be in reach of a lot more people. And IMHO that would still be the PRO device and they might add a cheaper one for the plebs later down the road

Unless of course there is a surprisingly high demand at those silly prices. Or we get another pandemic

Original iPod (2001): 5GB $399, 10GB $499.

 

[ethanwa79]

iPhone, iPad, Airpods, Apple Watch......

All of them have one thing in common. A lot of people (maybe even the majority) were laughing about them at the beginning.

And to be fair, all but the Airpods were pretty basic at the beginning and they took a while to improve and find their ground with software updates and apps.

Looking back, it is probably also not the worst idea to skip at least the first gen

News flash though: All were WELL under $1000 at launch. In fact, most still are. You see… they have to be AFFORDABLE to enough people.

You know how many people own Macs in the $3500+ range (Ultra Pro essentially)? VERY FEW.

Oh, and none of these covered half your face either.

This product will be extremely niche and won’t change the world in nearly the same way the products you mention did. Mainly because all of those you can use in public without any hindrance to your daily life or people around you.

 

[jz0309]

There are all kinds of "software" business models that make a good amount of money with that limitation: consuming the Pay-Per-View event, the "whole season", the international event, etc. through a 2D "window" we call a television, tablet, phone or sometimes movie screen. This is more like Star Trek holodeck junior (or maybe junior junior)... not able to stimulate all 5 senses... but apparently effectively fooling the 2 (arguably) most important ones.

I'm surprised a "think different" crowd seems to struggle with how much of a leap this can be. Yes, the software must be created to deliver on the upside potential of the hardware but that's how all new leaps begin. Hopefully, the Pelotons, the Pay-per-view crowd, the many sports leagues around the world, etc are all developing their "software" to take advantage of this opportunity, obviously from people with enough income to pay the one-time steep price of entry.

agree. everyone here is crying foul when we read about all these TV subscriptions going up, and I think it's actually who has stated that average cell phone plan in the US is over $110 (or so). And look how virtual we are all engaged in social media (yes, MR is social media but look at the billions of FB, TikTok etc ...).
HUGE opportunity for VP to offer alternatives that are imho better ...

 

[segfaultdotorg]

Meh. I'm waiting for the complete lineup:

• Apple iVision SE
• Apple iVision
• Apple iVision Plus
• Apple iVision Pro - the only one announced so far
• Apple iVision Pro Plus
• Apple iVision Ultra

 

[JamesHolden]

They likely won't change the price of gen 1, but will make gen 2 cheaper.

Agreed.

Can't remember all of them, but the Macbook Air started out at about $1700 and later they eventually made and sold one for $999.

True, but I think we'd need to compare model specs to get an accurate pricing history. I'm pretty sure the $999 model was the 11" screen. We'd also need to compare launch prices. I don't disagree, however, that prices do come down over time. The MacBook Air was launched 14 years ago.

I've never said that Vision Pro will be priced at $3500 forever, but I think it will take many many years before we see the price come down in any meaningful way. Even if it drops to $2500, that's still a huge amount of money, more than almost every device Apple sells.

First Apple TV started at $299 and later the 2nd and 3rd gen at $99.

The first Apple TV was a completely different device than the little black streaming boxes we know today, but I take your point. Vision Pro is a lot more complex, though, and does not benefit as much from Apple's other product lines as Apple TV. Apple TV is basically a stripped down iOS device that uses old processors. They didn't really have to develop anything new, hardware-wise, to build it. The OS and UI are pretty simple. Etc.

Vision Pro's hand tracking, cameras, sensors, etc. is all pretty much new. It will take a while to bring those costs down.

I mean rumors say they plan to produce less than 400'000 in 2024.... if they are not ready to produce at scale, they might as well charge as much for them as they can.

Agreed. Apple has a built-in fan customer base who will buy the product. How many that is remains to be seen. 400K in the first year seems reasonable to me. But the second year? They're going to have to convince everyone else that this product is worth $3500 and I don't think that will be an easy sell for a number of reasons.

I live in a very popular vacation town. Tourism has been insane for the past five years or so, but this summer was not nearly as busy as everyone expected. We've been promised a recession for years. Whether we have one or not, I do think people are tightening their purse strings. We're also heading into a sure to be turbulent election year and who knows what the fall-out will look like. Unless Apple gives them a very compelling reason, I don't see many people dropping $3500 on VR goggles in our current climate.

With the current hardware cost estimates i've seen (which is around $1600), my guess would be that they will eventually lower the prices to about $2500 once they produce a later version at scale. At which point it will be in reach of a lot more people. And IMHO that would still be the PRO device and they might add a cheaper one for the plebs later down the road

$2500 is still a ton of money for most people. I agree that, many years from now, we'll probably see a Vision SE. Although, unlike the iPhone, I'm not sure what compromises they can make with the Vision.

Camera is one of the major differentiating features of the iPhone. The average person, however, is probably more than happy with the basic iPhone camera. They probably never print pictures or need the additional image quality that the Pro models offer. What will Apple do with Vision Pro vs. Vision SE? It's hard to imagine that they'd offer a version without spatial video, for example.

Unless of course there is a surprisingly high demand at those silly prices. Or we get another pandemic

I seriously doubt that there will be a high demand...and if we get another pandemic, I think the whole system is going to crash and Vision Pro sales will be the last thing on anyone's mind!

 

[Piggie]

For myself this is a bit like a Quadcopter.
I've looked at the for years, looking in amazement ad the video's some people create, and how they got better and better.
And yet I always held off as despite REALLY wanting to play with one, I know if I'm really honest with myself, after the initial fun period has worn off, I really have no actual use for one long term.
A bit like 3D printers, which again I've watched get better and better value for years now, and also I've love to have one to play and mess around with, but also if I really think about it, after the novelty of printing a few fun things has passed it's going to be another wasted purchase.
Now I like the concept of gaming and new environments in VR and also what you can do in AR, but I also really believe we've going to see a lot of "what am I actually going to use this for" realisations for some early buyers.

To note: I'd love to be wrong, VR/AR to really finally take off main stream, and I'm pretty sure it will eventually, but we are at least 5 if not 10 years away from hoping for that

 

[JamesHolden]

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in giving you 90% of the adult population "prefers in person" events - that number is ridiculously high ...
and a few hundred thousand units in the first year - I'll call that success.
edit: and this was an example of "life events" only, so add all those other use cases --> Success

First year sales aren't really the issue. There's no doubt they will sell a few hundred thousand, maybe even a million, units to the very affluent part of their built-in fan customer base. I also expect them to offer some generous financing options in order to sweeten the deal. I could see them offering 3 years at 0%. The question is, once the initial fan wave crests, are other people going to see the value? And can they afford it? A bunch of niche use cases isn't going to be a lucrative revenue stream for developers either.

 

[till]

I think it's best to look at the Vision Pro as a developer kit / early adopter device for the next ~5 years.

It's widely expected that Apple's long term goal is AR glasses, so Vision Pro exists mainly to build their software ecosystem towards that goal. But it's definitely true that developers are gonna have a hard time selling apps to such a small user base. It's gonna be a slow start, but I'm confident Apple is in it for the long haul.

 

[JamesHolden]

I think it's best to look at the Vision Pro as a developer kit / early adopter device for the next ~5 years.

Agreed.

It's widely expected that Apple's long term goal is AR glasses, so Vision Pro exists mainly to build their software ecosystem towards that goal. But it's definitely true that developers are gonna have a hard time selling apps to such a small user base. It's gonna be a slow start, but I'm confident Apple is in it for the long haul.

The question is, do people even want AR glasses? To me AR glasses feel like bad scifi. I can see specialized use cases for AR, so I don't think the technology has no merit, but I don't see people wanting to wear glasses instead of carrying phones. I don't think people want a screen shoved in their faces 24/7. If anything, people are recognizing the dangers of too much screen time and trying to get away from screens, not wear them. So while I agree with you that Apple is in it for the long haul, I'm not convinced that this whole direction isn't a total misfire.

 

[Royksöpp]

It actually doesn't look too bad on a person with a normal shaped and sized head. The Egg head model they used for all the promo shots did not do it justice.

 

[GhostRaider]

I have yet to actually see any AR/VR headset be successful. I don't expect this to be any different. Cool for a niche market but it's just not practical to have something strapped to your head. Something similar was said about the Xbox Kinect, exceeded expectations but at the end of the day people lost interest and never took off (and was not that expensive). But of course its understandable that Apple has to start somewhere and get feedback.

The only AR product I'd consider is if its AR glasses. Normal looking glasses with AR capabilities. This product solves a problem. Myopia and information. Immediate information at a glance, with eye prescription. Apple Vision does not solve a problem.

 

[Realityck]

All of this kind of thing becomes possible with Vpro. Too many of us seem to lack enough imagination to fully see the potential. This is NOT 3D TV redux (3D views through a 2D rectangle sitting out in front of us). This is an experience of being able to look all around us and see "there", wherever "there" happens to be.

There are all kinds of "software" business models that make a good amount of money with that limitation: consuming the Pay-Per-View event, the "whole season", the international event, etc. through a 2D "window" we call a television, tablet, phone or sometimes movie screen. This is more like Star Trek holodeck junior (or maybe junior junior)... not able to stimulate all 5 senses... but apparently effectively fooling the 2 (arguably) most important ones.

I'm surprised a "think different" crowd seems to struggle with how much of a leap this can be. Yes, the software must be created to deliver on the upside potential of the hardware but that's how all new leaps begin. Hopefully, the Pelotons, the Pay-per-view crowd, the many sports leagues around the world, the concert sellers, the show sellers, etc are all developing their "software" to take advantage of this opportunity, obviously from people with enough income to pay the one-time steep price of entry... just like millions have for a stationary bike, the mirror, etc.

While older generations grew up being more separated/independent, and younger generations grew up interacting more in teams or groups we now have Apple trying to pitch products that cater to lonely people. As techradar wrote in a article shorty after WWDC:

The entertainment part of the Apple Vision Pro demo during the keynote is telling, as it gave a glimpse of what the lonely reality would be like to watch a movie or show with the headset on. Although SharePlay allows you to watch an Apple TV Plus show with friends and family in different locations, you would still all be wearing separate headsets by yourself and not be sharing the experience.

This portrays the antisocial aspects of pitching headsets around other people such as you family. Yes its great you can run the equivalent of a watch party with others wearing headsets, but its still feels like a product that lacks normalcy in a work or home environment against sharing what you are doing. Other than the spatial nature of displaying information, wouldn't some future form of 3D imagery visible to several associates in a VTC setup just wholly obsolete this in the future?

We could however look at this VisionOS as preparation for the eventual successor to the headset era and Apple could shift to 3D displays technology when available using spatial apps.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I see such "anti-social" arguments in every other thread about this too and yet, we do it all the time now. Take the "youngsters" you reference. Do you ever see a group of them sitting together, never saying a word but laughing at each other's texts? This is the same crowd notorious for sleeping into the day and then staying up all night... in their rooms... texting and basically playing recluse already.

For both young and old segments, how often within minutes of being on a plane are headphones/buds in and those people essentially vanishing into their own world... to watch a movie "alone" or listen to music "alone" even when crammed up next to several people with whom they could easily interact. Others will have a laptop out doing some work "alone", etc. I fly frequently and I subjectively offer that probably about 40% of every flight I fly is people "checked out" with the abundant opportunity for in-person socialization jammed right up against them.

Vpro is only a whole new level of anti-social if people intend to live in them. Else, I see them as being out and on LESS than people have their faces immersed in their iPhone or iPad. Since apparently Vpro can't go for more than 2 hours and we all have some battery miser in us "in case we need it later", by design limitation, it is less likely to remove us from any kind of social opportunity than any of the other Apple major devices.

As to watching shows together or with multiple people in the same household wearing Vpros, I do NOT envision this replacing TVs for group watching experiences. When it is a family or group of friends gathered together, they watch on TV as they do now. When someone wants to watch something themselves or even while the rest are watching something else, they can do as they do now and go to another room for another TV or watch on Vpro, or their phone or their tablet or their laptop.

And then, on the flip side, instead of socially connecting to distant friends & family in texts & images posted to FB etc, or voice only in a phone call, if each end has one, it would be as close as possible to making the journey and being together in person... a few notches above a FaceTime call.

To me, this particular branch of the anti-Vpro stance is classic half full:half empty. Change perspective and one can see many opportunities for greater socialization than now. Else, if such arguments undermine the desirability of Vpro, get rid of the phones & tablets too because they already drive a great deal of isolation, even in crowds. If it's about hidden eyes, get rid of sunglasses, which are often ON when there's no sun glare. If it's about things on heads, get rid of helmets, wigs, hats, et all.

 

[Unami]

Because there are none? Vision Pro's "killer apps" are the big virtual screens, which I don't think will move the needle for most people, and entertainment, which looks quite promising. Will enough people spend $3500+ on a fancy portable movie theater experience that can't be shared with friends and family?

Certain people on these forums keep singing the praises of AR, assuring us again and again that it is a life changing technology. Yet, when you ask any of them to imagine a popular use case for AR....silence. They default to the boring, unimaginative, niche use cases of interior design, architectural walkthroughs, and medical (which will likely never happen since Apple is highly unlikely to have Vision Pro certified by governmental health authorities).

I'm still waiting for someone to give me a use case that appeals to a broad swath of "average" users. I don't think there is a "killer app" for Vision Pro, just like there hasn't been one for the Quest.

I think it has lots of potential. It's "Augmented Reality" so you could see things you don't see in normal reality.

Temperature/relative speed of objects, telescopic/microscopic view, distance to objects, night vision, business/relationship status of people, navigation & speed overlay, real time translation of writing and speech, sports watching (e.g. player names while in the stadion), sports practice (POV analysis of movement, where's the racing line/hiking trail?), instant replay of events in virtual space and with multiple viewpoints (e.g. from other people with a headset or 3D reconstruction), biofeedback on one's own perception, useage in a therapeutic environment, learning an instrument (projections of where you have to put your fingers on a guitar/keyboard+notes), porn and kinky sex overlays, documentation of things you do, interactive 3D art exhibitions, interactive education, repair/home improvement assist (where do I have to drill that hole, where to solder that contact, which of the screws I just dismantled go there,...?), visualizations of soundwaves in a room, finding things you misplaced in your flat, object identification (is that mushroom/snake poisonous?), warning of dangers (mines, radiation) and even some dystopic visions (e.g. making a neighbourhood look nicer than it is, deletion of unwanted people),...

In VR you can sometimes experience a tangible feeling of things just by seeing them. Sounds esoteric, but MR could alter your reality like a drug without the hangover. That seems like a broad application to me. (and would probably even be in the spirit of Steve Jobs. But I highly doubt that it will be Apple giving us that mind altering sex device )

All of these applications are obviously a market for future, leightweight and unobtrusive AR glasses, not a bulky AR/MR/VR prototype at $3500. (but somebody has to build the expensive prototype first).

All of those things are, by themselves, "niche" features, but they add up. I think, in the long run, being able to enhance one's senses to have an advantage over non-cyborgs will be the broad killer app. It's like the internet. Before the net you could also go to a library to look something up, write (non-e-)mail or get a dvd from the rental store, but as the internet and technology around it evolved, you got an advatage from using that avenue. I think, AR/MR is like the net in the 80ies - right now it's just a "vision" of things to come.

 

[dominiongamma]

Person
Woman
Man
Camera
TV


Apples new ad slogan for the product of wait…

 

[Manzanito]

I am hereby claiming that my goldfish morphs into a 12 foot great white whenever I put the theme from Jaws on the stereo. Bottom line: Anyone can claim anything without backing it up with proof.

Sounds fishy.

 

[mr.bee]

🤣

😂😂

 

[subjonas]

Because there are none? Vision Pro's "killer apps" are the big virtual screens, which I don't think will move the needle for most people, and entertainment, which looks quite promising. Will enough people spend $3500+ on a fancy portable movie theater experience that can't be shared with friends and family?

Certain people on these forums keep singing the praises of AR, assuring us again and again that it is a life changing technology. Yet, when you ask any of them to imagine a popular use case for AR....silence. They default to the boring, unimaginative, niche use cases of interior design, architectural walkthroughs, and medical (which will likely never happen since Apple is highly unlikely to have Vision Pro certified by governmental health authorities).

I'm still waiting for someone to give me a use case that appeals to a broad swath of "average" users. I don't think there is a "killer app" for Vision Pro, just like there hasn't been one for the Quest.

Why does there have to be a killer application for the mainstream and not just multiple killer applications for multiple sub groups? As long as the sub groups are substantial and/or add up to a substantial market, which I believe they do. The virtual monitors should be killer for many people who do their work using computers, the portable theater screen should be killer for singles and business travelers, and the job-specific applications that you alluded to may be boring to you but will be killer for each of them, and then games and experiences for those who are into that.
It may not have the “one application for all” that you’re looking for, and I don’t see why it needs to in order to be successful. Or it may have that too, we’ll see.

 

[Someirishguy]

The killer app is…. wait for it … Microsoft Office … just like it is on my laptop

The presentation Apple gave made it out as more of a laptop replacement, but with lots of extra capabilities, the next generation of computing, spatial computing

So the killer apps will the the spatial versions of the apps we already know and love on our laptops, but ‘optimised’ and potentially better

For everyone of these that Apple sells, instead of a laptop, they make more money

Perhaps the time IS right, as so many people work at home (me included), the isolated geek element doesn’t really come into play most of the time.

I best be careful, or I might convince myself to get one … 👀

 

[mr.bee]

I understand, but all their products have different price ranges, so time will tell

 

[Unami]

So the killer apps will the the spatial versions of the apps we already know and love on our laptops, but ‘optimised’ and potentially better

I'm kind of not sold on that. The "spatial computing" promise looked a lot like iPadOS on multiple screens (including Sidecar) - so those are the versions of productivity apps we already know but certainly don't love. But it got a lot of potential (again, like the ipad)

 

[tomtad]

The killer app is…. wait for it … Microsoft Office … just like it is on my laptop

The presentation Apple gave made it out as more of a laptop replacement, but with lots of extra capabilities, the next generation of computing, spatial computing

So the killer apps will the the spatial versions of the apps we already know and love on our laptops, but ‘optimised’ and potentially better

For everyone of these that Apple sells, instead of a laptop, they make more money

Perhaps the time IS right, as so many people work at home (me included), the isolated geek element doesn’t really come into play most of the time.

I best be careful, or I might convince myself to get one … 👀

The problem is with this is I can do the exact same thing just without a heavy, 2 hour limited battery device attached with multiple straps to my head.

It might be a novelty at first but after a few goes you just know you’ll end up getting your laptop out instead.

 

[jonblatho]

Apple Claims Vision Pro SDK Downloads Exceeded Expectations​

This is ridiculous. All it takes is pushing a button in Xcode and having the disk space available to download it. I can’t speak for everyone who’s done so, but as for me, I’ve downloaded the visionOS beta SDK for work despite us having no imminent interest in actually developing for the Vision Pro just because I was curious how our existing iOS app runs on it. (Not great!)

extremely high, three-digit customer satisfaction

As others have said, this isn’t just ridiculous, it’s meaningless.