AVP looks great. I can’t justify the current price but will buy when there’s an affordable version.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Code Confirms Vision Pro With M5 Chip
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Honest answer here. There seem to be enough people interested in it to create long threads of people asking questions like this every time it is mentioned. Just the interest from people that only want to complain about it is enough to generate multiple articles. Any product that generates that much hate from its detractors usually generates a similar amount of passion from its supporters, so, yeah, if Apple gets this to a reasonably affordable price point, I could see it being a sustainable sized market.
But full VR/AR headsets definitely have an effort factor to wear, so, even as a fan, I would expect the appeal to be limited to that specific group until they get it down to a sunglasses style form factor (and maybe even after that, considering how many people see wearing 3D glasses to watch a movie as a major drawback).
Last edited:
Assuming Apple sold the worst case 200,000 units I’ve seen mentioned here (I’ve seen more estimates at double that number), and your assumption that there are probably few developers, that would make it a ripe market for a developer with a good app idea. Since the AVP sells for $3500 in the USA, I would expect anyone that dropped that amount of cash would likely be eager to pay $20 for a must-have app if they are starved for app choices, so, if I did my math right, that would be $14 per unit for the developer if Apple takes 30%, opening up a the potential for $2.8 million if you write a must-have app, even if only 200,000 AVP were sold. I guess that is small potatoes to a group like Epic, but I expect it would sound pretty good to most independent developers.
It sounds great to me, so I wish I had a good idea for an app to test this theory.
Nonsense. if it wasn't so ridiculously expensive, I would have bought it on day one to replace my Meta Quest 3. The AVP is superior to the Quest on every account.
Meta is selling boatloads of their spyware infected Quest. VR headsets do sell, it's a niche product for now sure, but they do sell in significant amounts.
Spyware? I assume you are referring to Horizon OS itself, or is there something I should be researching?
Current users, is a faster chip really the most-needed upgrade? How is the image resolution and span? I've heard it is good but still not to proper "retina" levels. Of course more horsepower is needed to support an increase, but horsepower alone means nothing unless the actual projection hardware is upgraded as well.
I use my AVP for work and to experience movies, TV shows, photos, and videos in ways I can’t with any other device. In both cases I’m explicitly not interacting with my family, much as I am when I’m in a corner reading a book. I think that’s healthier and more honest than pretending to listen to them at the dinner table.
In an interview with one of VRs godfathers the battery pack received high praise.
He says this will desensitise people and get them used to carry an external pack with them.
He argues that this pack can and will develop into something more crucial than just something that’s delivering juice to the goggles.
EDIT:
“I think the real reason Apple took the battery out of their head isn’t because this device mightn’t have a battery on, say, the back of the headset, which would be fine. It’s because they’re setting that expectation in people that it’s okay to get it out of their head so that in the future they can add more processing, more radios, and more batteries with an external accessory instead of keeping it in the headset. Because that’s what will allow Apple’s device to basically become a very thin pair of glasses”
Last edited:
It’s hard to say how this is going to be compared to the current screen people stare at. Unfortunately, right now it’s socially acceptable to stare at your screen during social interactions and driving. There seems to be some pushback with the same behavior when it comes to AR or VR glasses. I suspect this pushback will be reduced once they start looking like normal eyewear.
One could debate so this is a better alternative to the current system. Currently people stare down at their phone, not even looking at the other person. With AR they might be looking at additional things, but staring down at something not physically present might make them feel awkward so they will look at the other person. Who knows what will happen though. I don’t believe this will come out in my lifetime.
So, where exactly do you feel it is socially acceptable to stare at your screen while driving? That sounds like a very good place to avoid ever driving.
It's going to be real interesting to see how Apple handles this. On iOS, there isn't really a processor distinction, devices are just phased out after ~5 years. On Mac, the same thing applies, but over longer periods. But on the Mac people are used to "system requirements" and realize that their Macbook Air can't run Cyberpunk 2077. The Vision Pro is kind of in-between these two worlds - more technical than iOS, but a far cry from macOS.
On the Vision Pro there will basically be two devices, the fast one and the slow one. I wonder if they will allow developers to only target the M5 headset. I'd guess probably not - since the market is so incredibly small, to limit it even further would cause problems. But at the same time, the M2 is going to hold back experiences that are only possible with more processing power.
My main question would be whether they will increase RAM - a lot of memory is likely already dedicated to the AR world mapping processing, so the remaining space is limited for applications + on device AI.
On the Vision Pro there will basically be two devices, the fast one and the slow one. I wonder if they will allow developers to only target the M5 headset. I'd guess probably not - since the market is so incredibly small, to limit it even further would cause problems. But at the same time, the M2 is going to hold back experiences that are only possible with more processing power.
My main question would be whether they will increase RAM - a lot of memory is likely already dedicated to the AR world mapping processing, so the remaining space is limited for applications + on device AI.
Yes the OS . The reason the Quest's price is so low, is because it's basically a conduit for Facebook's privacy invasion business model. They announced a while back that everything you're watching, doing , measuring ( including data about your home when in transparency mode or creating the safe areas about you ) will be transmitted to them.
Really there is no point releasing one so soon if they won't bother changing any of the other problems with vr devices
Lots of people who bought them are perfectly happy with them. Others not so much, but I don’t see a lot of complaints about nasty/smelly/dirty, heavy yes, and “not much to do with it once you have watched all the immersive content during the first day, and all the 3D movies in the first week”, but that is about it.
I have one and am happy enough with it. It works well when I’m using a laser cutter projecting a very large Mac screen I can use while working on the cutter (with LightBurn & some custom Mac software), while also being a pretty effective “not gonna look at the laser when I’m not actually looking at anything in the room!” kind of deal. Granted I’m not really taking much advantage of the Vision’s capabilities of doing “3D stuff”, but hey, turns out I can pay $3k for a very expensive 3D TV and be happy that it is also a nice external display for my Mac.
There is two immediate benefit to upgrading the CPU and GPU. Yes the current iteration of VisionOS is running super smooth on the M2. BUT passthrough is a bit weak and low quality (much higher quality then its competitors but not good enough for a 3.5k product).
The camera isn't the limitation, it's Apple limiting the pass through resolution to keep the experience smooth. A bump to the GPU performance will allow Apple to run a much higher resolution passthrough experience, which is a big deal for me. (and one of the only reasons I returned my Vision Pro)
In addition the M2 is not that efficient it gets quite hot and sometimes the fans will even spin up and this is attached to your face so an M5 with a lot of breathing room can run cooler and much more efficient. Which then in turn can give us some better battery life.