Well Xbox works very well at that model, Apple need to work at that way now to sell more and attract more users then apps. By the way Meta sold 20 millions headsets already. Apple came late so it needs to sell more to catch up.
Last edited:
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 Has Sold Approximately 200,000 Vision Pro Headsets
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That the quest costs only $500 is both a blessing and a curse, IMO. Yes, it’s cheap, and users will get what they pay for, and there’s only so much room for better specs and hardware if users signal that they aren’t willing to pay any more for one.
Not all headsets are created equal. I won’t be surprised if the Vision Pro becomes the Meta headset’s “blackberry” moment and it’s now Facebook who has to catch up, except there is no market for a $3500 headset if your company isn’t named Apple.
Of course AVP is better, but the $3500 price tag is a suicide. iPhone only got really popular when it became subsidized by carrier and sold for $200.
And yet here we are today paying more for an iPhone than a MBA.
I don’t disagree that we will likely see a cheaper, more streamlined V2.0, but for now, Apple seems to know that they will likely be supply-constrained for the first couple of years, and therefore priced the Vision Pro at $3500 in order to maximise profits. I believe the early adopters know what they are getting themselves into.
Enjoy your Vision Pro on day one, and don’t let the haters tell you that you are using it wrong. 🫡
I'll come back in a year and see how it's doing. I suspect like 3D TV it'll have a brief surge of popularity and then fade into nothingness... and with 3D TV all you had to do was wear a pair of "normal" glasses and people couldn't be bothered after a while.
Do you think if they'd only sold 20,000 units and "recovered" $700 million it would be more than they spent on the RnD?
Who is going to be the first person to wear this into a coffee shop and be "that guy."
Definitely sounds cool for an optional viewing experience. Something to try out now and then to mix things up. That being said, I think a lot of AVP owners would give it a try, but ultimately will find that they prefer a traditional TV set with friends or family, with all the different camera angles and instant replays, etc available to them. Being there in person is one thing; simulating it with a VR/AR headset is not quite the same and can never truly capture that experience.
But I can imagine if there was a way to watch a live sporting event or concert with the AVP and it provided the option of switching camera angles and giving a mix of simulating being there in person with more traditional television broadcasts, then that could be a unique experience that could be appealing to a wider audience.
Asking consumers to take the intentional step of covering their faces or eyes with extra hardware is a hurdle that has never really caught on. Going back decades (I’m thinking as far back as the Nintendo Virtual Boy in the 90s. But probably even further.) Meta has had some very limited success, but it’s years later and their vision has largely failed to materialize. If any company can succeed in this space, then it’s probably Apple, but they definitely have their work cut out…
Yeah, round(ceil(******number)) to act like it’s good.
I really wish the ****ing shilling will end, it’s a garbage product with no market pushed because tim cook’s ego, same for the damn apple card.
And some 10% thinking that an unopened box of the original Vision Pro will give them 100k in 10 years.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Live virtual presence is going to be the killer app/use case for the AVP.
It is going to be absolutely massive.
/edit 15 minutes before the reviews go live
How cool would it be if, as a thank you to the early adopters, Apple streamed the Super Bowl live from multiple 8K spatial video cameras set up around the stadium, for free, to owners of the AVP...
Last edited:
You mean the people paying health insurance, paying for cars, paying a mortgage, paying bills, saving for their kids college, saving for retirement, organising family holidays, feeding their family, funding their hobbies, etc, etc?
I'm in the top 10-15% or earners where I live, and I'd baulk at paying €3,500 (or whatever they will charge in Europe) because it would involve choosing what is essentially a toy over other, more important stuff.
Not all people have the luxury of no responsibilities. For those who can afford it, or who choose to save for it, good luck to you, but the vast majority of people will never consider this at that sort of price. It's not realistically attainable for most people without sacrifice that most will not be willing to make.
I need to re-quote this now-long-forgotten 🏆 trophy 🏆 reply.
Given these produce the best Holodeck package today - at least a small percent of the population want it. The amount of technology crammed into this headset will take a long time to successfully enter a Holodeck with just something as lightweight as Oakley sunglasses. Especially if they are literally 10x better in picture quality and immersion comfort than a typical 3-figure-priced headset.
Even then, not everyone will want/need it.
But there will be a larger proportion of population as the demand goes up geometrically with price drops.
One Economics 101 indicates a pretty steep curve, e.g. graphs showing ~3x-10x more sales at half price in some product categories. People who say no at $3500 Version 1 are a wee bit slightly more likely say yes at $999 Version 3, for example. Even at the same price, the same people saying no to clunky Windows brick-tablets in 2005 began saying yes to iPads in 2015, y'know?
By 100x less eyestrain, some of the best existing expensive headsets (not Apple) are so much more eye-comfortable 3D (less eyestrain, more realistic 3D that you forget it's fake 3D) than cinema/3DTV fad screens watched via Disney3D/Real3D glasses already, and possibly Apple is one of them. Many people who hate 3D, may not already realize that some of the ergonomics have improved so much, that the highest-end headsets has already surpassed eye-comfort of 3D movies by a large margin for some content. Obviously, cheap VR headsets will still be uncomfortable and eyestraining, but there are those superlative headsets that are among the most eye-comfortable 3D you've ever seen. This does not apply to everyone, but, undoubtedly Apple probably focussed very carefully on this item; to de-gimmick it as much as possible.
And there's more than one price halvings avialable in that $3500 starting-pistol price, even still remaining at Apple premium after about two halvings.
The main thing is the dork factor, but we've got those pocket supercomputers called smartphones that we do crazy things with, such as taking photos of grocery items to literally wirelessly telegraph to our spouses to ask "is this the correct item?". We don't use a film camera, take a photo at the store, develop the film, go all the way back home, show the spouse the photo, ask if it is the correct grocery item. It may someday not be dorky anymore when we Holodeck with AppleOakley sunglasses occasionally, even if only 5% of the population does (still a big market if cheap enough). Who knows?
Given these produce the best Holodeck package today - at least a small percent of the population want it. The amount of technology crammed into this headset will take a long time to successfully enter a Holodeck with just something as lightweight as Oakley sunglasses. Especially if they are literally 10x better in picture quality and immersion comfort than a typical 3-figure-priced headset.
Even then, not everyone will want/need it.
But there will be a larger proportion of population as the demand goes up geometrically with price drops.
One Economics 101 indicates a pretty steep curve, e.g. graphs showing ~3x-10x more sales at half price in some product categories. People who say no at $3500 Version 1 are a wee bit slightly more likely say yes at $999 Version 3, for example. Even at the same price, the same people saying no to clunky Windows brick-tablets in 2005 began saying yes to iPads in 2015, y'know?
By 100x less eyestrain, some of the best existing expensive headsets (not Apple) are so much more eye-comfortable 3D (less eyestrain, more realistic 3D that you forget it's fake 3D) than cinema/3DTV fad screens watched via Disney3D/Real3D glasses already, and possibly Apple is one of them. Many people who hate 3D, may not already realize that some of the ergonomics have improved so much, that the highest-end headsets has already surpassed eye-comfort of 3D movies by a large margin for some content. Obviously, cheap VR headsets will still be uncomfortable and eyestraining, but there are those superlative headsets that are among the most eye-comfortable 3D you've ever seen. This does not apply to everyone, but, undoubtedly Apple probably focussed very carefully on this item; to de-gimmick it as much as possible.
And there's more than one price halvings avialable in that $3500 starting-pistol price, even still remaining at Apple premium after about two halvings.
The main thing is the dork factor, but we've got those pocket supercomputers called smartphones that we do crazy things with, such as taking photos of grocery items to literally wirelessly telegraph to our spouses to ask "is this the correct item?". We don't use a film camera, take a photo at the store, develop the film, go all the way back home, show the spouse the photo, ask if it is the correct grocery item. It may someday not be dorky anymore when we Holodeck with AppleOakley sunglasses occasionally, even if only 5% of the population does (still a big market if cheap enough). Who knows?
Last edited:
You should not pay attention to these commenter. They are not very bight in their head.. Who knows, maybe they are some six graders how got some time allowed to be on the internet for next 15 minutes
But the early generation Apple TVs were just reusing a bunch of commodity parts Apple probably needed to get rid of anyway. The first-gen Apple TV can literally boot OS X.
I love how divisive this product is.
You have Apple fans thinking this thing is the next iPhone and the other half not seeing the point of the device.
I’m going to just sit here and eat my popcorn 🍿
You have Apple fans thinking this thing is the next iPhone and the other half not seeing the point of the device.
I’m going to just sit here and eat my popcorn 🍿