Apple Has Given Up on the Vision Pro After M5 Refresh Flop

[mrr]

Simply too expensive.

 

[habe82]

What the Apple Newton was to John Sculley, the Apple Vision Pro is to Tim Cook—an idiosyncratic product with some solid technological underpinnings and software concepts that was brought to market a generation too early.

It’s worth remembering that the Newton is why the modern ARM architecture exists at all. Sometime in the 2030s Apple will release something with Vision Pro DNA that will fulfill the promise of spatial computing. Right now the hardware is too over-engineered and cumbersome for casual use.

Well said!

 

[Marswarrior462]

Haha lmao! What did you expect? You can't charge $5000 for something and expect it to sell well! As someone who is interested in the Vision Pro (but can't afford one), I am not surprised and knew this was coming

 

[revfife]

Steve Jobs would never have released it like this in the first place.

Steve Jobs would have never developed it to begin with. It was a horrible idea when it was just an idea. Wasn't he still on board with Pixar when they released Wall-E?

People don't want to walk around with goggles stuck on their head all the time. Glasses I can see through and don't look like you are about to go snorkeling. Meta has the right concept, wrong company to develop it.

I think Mixed Reality is an emerging field, but jumbo scuba gear is not it.

 

[groove-agent]

They really should have sold this at a lower price and incurred a slight loss just to get it in more hands and build the ecosystem.

I doubt they could get it down to a price where a significant amount of people would buy it.

VR headsets are cool, but are uncomfortable and sometimes a pain to set up. I have a Valve Index and barely use it because of how uncomfortable it is, and I have to drag out my IR sensors each time I use it (I don't leave them set up).

I'd be mostly interested in trying VR/ AR to replace a multi-monitor setup for productivity. Still, the biggest technological challenge is the make it comfortable to wear, and to make it so that you don't feel like you're tethered with connection cables.

 

[DerekK]

It's a good product, but a little ahead of its time, and definitely way too expensive.

Apple should have made a v2 without the front facing screen. This would have reduced the weight and improved the battery life for a feature that I don't think many people cared for.

 

[turbineseaplane]

This form factor just isn’t going to be it.

I think those of us here (all of us on the forum) who are very tech oriented don’t realize just how intensely unpopular this type of device actually is for normal people.

You just never gonna get a mainstream critical mass that wants to put on such a clunky, socially isolating, device for more than novelty usage.

 

[revfife]

What the Apple Newton was to John Sculley, the Apple Vision Pro is to Tim Cook—an idiosyncratic product with some solid technological underpinnings and software concepts that was brought to market a generation too early.

It’s worth remembering that the Newton is why the modern ARM architecture exists at all. Sometime in the 2030s Apple will release something with Vision Pro DNA that will fulfill the promise of spatial computing. Right now the hardware is too over-engineered and cumbersome for casual use.

Newton was ahead of its time. I had two of them. Loved them both, but they were a device without a market.

They also led to Sculley's dismissal as CEO. The Apple board isn't close to what it once was, otherwise Tim would have been canned already.

 

[citysnaps]

They also led to Sculley's dismissal as CEO. The Apple board isn't close to what it once was, otherwise Tim would have been canned already.

Perhaps it's because that under Cook's leadership over the years, Apple now has 1+ Billion active/happy/repeat customers, propelling Apple to becoming one of the most successful consumer tech companies in the world.

 

[Sallah]

In terms of hardware, absolutely. But as I always say when it comes to iPhone vs Android, app parity is the real test that everyone ignores. And unfortunately for Apple (in this case) they are the poorer choice.

The Quest 3 is really good hardware, nice and light with responsive controllers. The gaming experience has titles such as Tetris Effect and Rez Infinite, both of which are worth the price of entry alone IMO and this is only the tip of ther iceberg. But you can also do some cool AR stuff with it like visit an architectural model at 1:1 because the passthrough experience is good enough.

If VR is an entertainment platform first and a productivity platform second, the Vision Pro doesn't even come close. Its so easy to throw a Quest 3 into a suitcase for a business trip and enjoy VR games, Gamepass streaming, 3DS emulation and movies on a big screen whilst stuck in a hotel.

The AVP will play PS5 and Steam games on a massive screen with much better image quality (IQ). Same with movies and “immersive” content. The hardware powers the experience, that the Quest 3 simply can’t match.

Now I will say, if you’re looking to play actual VR games, then the Quest 3 is your better bet. But for everything else, the AVP dominates.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Now I will say, if you’re looking to play actual VR games, then the Quest 3 is your better bet. But for everything else, the AVP dominates.

...and there in lies the problem.

"play actual VR games" is literally the only thing moving VR headsets in any mainstream volume these days.

If Apple had released AVP with a fleshed out gaming narrative, developer relationships and incentives and cohesive plan for segment growth, all of this might be going better than it is for them.

 

[cjackson951]

Could they have possibly given up on the VisionPro because they're pivoting their energies towards the AI Glasses?

 

[groove-agent]

The biggest issue is the price. I wonder how much they could sell it for if they didn't build in a GPU/ CPU. Maybe have it powered by an iPhone Pro/ Pro Max instead although I'm sure that would have its own set of technological challenges, one of which is battery life. Maybe there could be some sort of splitter cable that connects to the USBC port on the phone that keeps it charged?

Imagine just connecting the headset via USB C to your phone and voila.

 

[vantelimus]

I agree. I really don't think the version of AVP that released would have ever seen the light of day under Steve.

His product editing was one of his really core strength areas.

Everybody seems to know what Steve would do–except for Steve, because he's dead.

 

[dapa0s]

So they didn't even sell it on most markets, it's still not available in most of EU, and this is their conclusion? And not bothered to upgrade it, make it cheaper, make it lighter? What were they thinking?

 

[Adelphos33]

I said this before - the first Apple product in decades that I had zero interest in even demoing.

The thing is - a lot of these new products that Apple and others are coming out with, I don’t see the need of exploring. I’ll take a look at the foldable phone, but it’s not something I think I will have any interest in. I have no interest in the glasses - I have not looked at the Meta ones. I don’t really have any interest in the screen home devices or any AI pin (just put any of these new AI features in the watch, which I love for fitness). I realize others may have interest in these products, but I don’t. Maybe that will change when I see them. But most of these products just don’t have the same universal appeal as better phones, computers and even watches for me.

Or maybe I’m just getting old

 

[turbineseaplane]

Or maybe I’m just getting old

No, it's not your age.

VR headsets are actually a fairly mature space and no combination of pricing and better hardware/features can overcome many of the drawbacks of the form factor and the social isolation.

That's not to say they have no place, but rather that they are niche and always will be, at least in this specific form factor.

When people say "wait until they are just glasses!"

A. We aren't very close to that (for doing what the AVP can do -- the MetaPervs are not an AVP)
B. That's a really different product actually, as it would be mixed reality by nature.

 

[vantelimus]

Perhaps it's because that under Cook's leadership over the years, Apple now has 1+ Billion active/happy/repeat customers, propelling Apple to becoming one of the most successful consumer tech companies in the world.

Not to mention the fact that in the 14.5 years since Jobs' death, the market cap of Apple has gone from $300 billion to $4 trillion. No board would fire a CEO who is giving them an effective 19.5% annual growth rate for almost 15 years the way Cook has. (That 19.5% rate doesn't include dividends, which add another 1.2%/year).

 

[dc455]

It is way too premium to sell at lower price. Most people don’t want or need such power and all that spatial nonsense. It is simply not possible with current technology. Making it a 1000$ device would require to bring super cheap tech inside: cheaper processor (A series, not flagship M chip), lower resolution displays, potentially not even OLED, simple cameras like in RayBan Meta. On the other hand, battery life will be very good and they will be much lighter. However there is hardly any market for it. Again, majority of people are used to do their work on smartphones and computers, they don’t want to wear some helmets for that

I think you're 100% right - but a boy can dream. I hope they take another swing at it later. Again, it was such a great experience to use.

 

[MacCheetah3]

[...] The price sealed the deal.

I read about higher end business use cases though that sounded interesting. But does it move the needle enough for Apple to maintain interest? I doubt it.

Sad, but predictable. It's a fancy, glossy R&D project that wasn't ready for the mass market.

Microsoft's very first Surface was this largely forgotten coffee table sized-tablet that Bill Gates loved

Nobody remembers this original 30-inch Microsoft Surface.

www.businessinsider.com

A Surface History: Microsoft’s Ever-Evolving Vision for the Future of Computing

With its wide-ranging family of hardware, Microsoft has reimagined how we compute—again and again. As the company turns 50, let's revisit the twists and turns of its transformative Surface line.

tech.yahoo.com

I love my AVP, as a person with low vision, it enabled a whole new world to me. I can read books in giant size, magnify my Mac screen and also enjoy content in a way that is comfortable for me. I’m sad to hear that Apple is giving up on such a great product. It’s not perfect, of course, but it has so much potential. I hope the future software updates give us even more accessibility features and more functionality for this device.

I primarily use my AVP as low vision glasses. I was an eSight user up until last November. Unfortunately, my eSight 4 failed (in a few ways) hardware-wise, the most critical issue being able to reliably connect to external power — and their battery firmware being glitchy at best. Of course, I could have gone with the eSight Go. Although, eSight has also moved to the enclosed headset/glasses form. Additionally, the AVP is $2,000 cheaper and has the fun, neat aspects; therefore, I figured it was worth trying that path. For the most part, the AVP does very well. I did leave feedback about, mostly a request for improved zoom quality, possibly via ML (for the current hardware version), but hopefully optical zoom in a hardware revision. I wear it several hours a day for work with little discomfort. Unfortunately, I receive plenty, too many (unnecessary) rude comments. Anyway… It’s apparent the AVP demonstrates a lot of potential.

Hanging 2D iPad windows around one's work area is....weak. They should have created an immersive 3D UI, they should have WOWED us. They didn't, so people didn't care.

The moment visionOS 26 dropped and iPad apps were still there, we all knew they’d checked out.

I'd love to see an immersive maps app. Think of it, they could make those appear at scale and it would be absolutely incredible.

I think app development or rather lack thereof has also been a key factor. Apple is indeed guilty of this as well with visionOS, as noted the lack of effort in many first-party visionOS apps. A sub-reason is modern culture being more and more greedy. People, in this case software developers, are so focused/worried about profit, most put zero effort into it. What happened to the mentality of creating things for the fun of it? In other words, the opportunity and appeal of AR/MR (mixed reality) seemingly failed not because the benefits aren’t there, but because people are more/most concerned with “will I rake in boatloads of money?"

A small example of what can be done if you embrace general VR/AR/MR:

Santa's Village: a tiny magical North Pole world for Apple Vision Pro

Hi all, With the holidays coming up, I wanted to share a project I built entirely for Apple Vision Pro. Over the last three weeks, I created Santa’s Village, a fully immersive holiday micro-world that transforms your space into a living North Pole diorama. It just launched on the App Store, and...

forums.macrumors.com

A more advanced example:

ForeFlight - Voyager

ForeFlight Voyager for Apple Vision Pro is your first-class ticket to airport exploration in the era of spatial computing!

foreflight.com

Another:

Spectrum Front Row tips off January 9 on Apple Vision Pro

Apple and Spectrum unveiled the schedule for The Lakers in Apple Immersive, a series of live basketball games in a revolutionary storytelling format available only on Apple Vision Pro.

www.apple.com

The court side (180º video) view is very neat.

Basically, overall, passion has seemingly taken a far back seat versus profit —* look at the tech/PC industry in a whole right now. …Or should I say a capitalist black hole… Moving along...

Well… People want smth like RayBan Meta: all-around device with many compromises and photo/video recording. They don’t really need a computer on their head, especially such impractical one. This is not a year 2000 anymore. Back then people wanted to escape reality so they chased computers and Internet. These days… people would rather escape Internet and chase reality.

Sad that Apple had to waste a lot of money on something that failed to take off. On the other hand, maybe this mistake will become a good lesson

Uh…. My common observation is people absorbing massive amounts of stupidity with their blaring social media videos, including but not limited to while walking down the street, through stores, and during checkout. To be frank, (these) people might as well be physically immersed in Project Moron (i.e., the modern social media reality distortion field).

 

[jingbugle]

Expensive and a product that looks weird. I am surprised how Apple came up with it in the first place when there were already ideas about simple eyeglasses with AR.

 

[jbc25]

[
It didn't take off in the 90s because we didn't have the technology to make it decent in the 90s. We could barely render simple 3D graphics to a traditional monitor at a decent frame rate before the end of the 90s. We didn't even have inexpensive motion sensors in the 90s.
The first decent VR devices were released 10 years ago, and VR has been a moderately sized niche since then.

Whatever you think of VR, "they've been trying it since the 90s (or earlier)" is just an unserious argument against its viability. VR has an extremely high technological floor to be "good enough" at any tasks (such as some gaming and media watching) let alone for general computing.

As I said, I'm critical of the form factor and the idea of strapping a massive visor on your head that isolates you. I'm not complaining about the technology, which is impressive, but it's at the expense of wearing that stupid thing. Meta was smarter in going with glasses that can be worn in more situations. Those glasses probably won't be able to do everything the VP can do anytime soon, but I don't think it needs to.

 

[Websnapx2]

Ok, but that chip didn’t solve any pain point the user is complaining about.

I didn’t say it would — I only mean the value proposition is harder to make with a years old chip for that amount of money to a new customer. What you are referring to is a new version of a product that has been redesigned (thus, addressing previous issues) when this is just a spec update so that someone looking to buy it today doesn’t feel like they are essentially buying a two-years old product because it has a more modern chipset at the same premium price. Sort of like how the AirPods Max were upgraded to the H2 chip and USB-C, but not adjusted for the weight, the lack of off button, an improved canopy, or a better case.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

This product wasn't a waste of Apple time and money. Apple learned a lot with this project. Many ideas and tech used on this product will for sure creep in other products. Sometimes really making a difference, sometimes not in the best way.

Yet was is for sure a waste of some peoples money.

PS: For people with money to waste, nothing is a waste of money. So these, don't really have a say on the matter. I am glad I resisted pulling the trigger every time I tried to rationalize it ... as many many other people surely did.

 

[Scarpad]

I wonder if it was the totally outrageous price tag.

All the same, sometimes you need to push the boat out and try new things.

i tried the google xr headset also an abandoned flop, i'm fine with the quest 3 for watching conten at 1/7th the price