It was getting hot in here reading this. Sweating all over the place. But thanks to the my trusty apple cleaning cloth i could wipe this sweat away.
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 Likely Planning to Use Bigger, Lower Resolution Displays for Cheaper Vision Headset
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Needs to be $999 and identical to a pair of designer sunglasses if they ever want it to succeed and generate the type of revenue iOS/iPhones did
Nobody wants to wear a stupid welding mask on their face with a wired brick battery, and the abysmal sales figures reflect this.
Nobody wants to wear a stupid welding mask on their face with a wired brick battery, and the abysmal sales figures reflect this.
If your use case is something like watching movies, or sports, how does “efficiency” come into play? We’re taking qualitative vs quantitative here.
It's necessary if they want to knock down the price to something people would pay.
4k for the pro with on device processing vs sub 1k for a device that's tethered.
Apple have pro/non pro versions among nearly all their product lines; no reason they can't target both markets.
Battery life isn't an issue when the thing is being used at home with a tether anyway. They'd just plug it into the wall. In fact; omitting a battery would save some of the weight/ergonomic issues they'e having.
The most impressive part of my Vision Pro demo was not seeing any pixels. All the newer devices I own have retina screens but now we need to downgrade? Why? There isnt enough content worth paying even half for this device. Content is king. Second is price. If the cameras and visuals are worse than the expensive one it's not worth it. Just make a headset that uses the iPad or computer it is tethered to, keep the screens and get rid of the guts. And make it so it's more a desk and couch device. That would keep the price down and make it useful. And also not tie it as much to the content of which there it is woefully lacking. But as a content consumption device of a bunch of 2D content, a lower price would make it more acceptable. You get rid of the visuals, then who cares about this overpriced thing?
So, they will rebrand the current one as the iVision Pro, and the poverty-spec model will be called the iVision?
Apple is not aiming for a sub 1k device. They're aiming for a device that uses visionOS, that they can ramp up production for, and that non-enthusiasts might start to be interested in. XREAL or some other manufacturer can probably get into the simple tethered display market in the next few years, but Apple is not going to do that.
Eventually there will be competitors on the market that have displays comparable to what Apple has right now. Apple wants to have that superior software system experience locked in before everyone else has a chance to catch up with their superior hardware. A headset that is half the price of the pro version, can be rapidly scaled up in production, and is still better than any competitor on the market is possible with these 2.1inch micro-OLED panels. Wait for used versions of that device to trickle down if you really want a sub-$1k device.
Many folks saying different versions of this. It’s poppycock.
The expense of a manufacturing process is often in the development of the process. The idea that you save enough money by redeveloping how the new AV gets made is just not realistic.
The outer display is complicated, but not technically difficult, especially now that it has already been developed…nor does it cost much compared to the two incredibly high resolution screens for the eyes. And making it ‘more basic’ does not save that much money—it just indicates that Apple is right that making things out of glass and aluminum does make users think ‘it’s expensive’.
Apple seem acutely aware that the market's appetite for a top end product at a high price is quite limited. Introducing a cut down version of the product for not much less than the flagship is going to be DOA. The people price sensitive to a 4k device today will still be price sensitive to a 2-3k device.
Fact of the matter is they're going to need that mass market adoption if they want the platform to have a chance of survival and that does mean having the price reduced to a point where people can fit it into their budgets. The price point itself is arbitrary; but from a consumer's point of view; they seem okay with spending 1k on a new iphone, or a new macbook or a new ipad and would buy an upgraded one of those every few years; the current AVP is coming in at a price point that's all of those combined.
I have no doubt that if the avp was flying off the shelves with a year long backorder list that they'd be going all in on it. Instead all the rumours so far are of cutting production of the pro model or a refocus to a cheaper model. People may not like the idea of a cut down model; but if the alternative is pulling the plug on the project altogether then that's not going to help reach those longterm goals
A Vision that is half the price of the Vision Pro is the cut down cheaper model! That's what the cheaper displays mean! The displays in the current Vision Pro are generations ahead of anyone else, so there is plenty of room for them to dip down the quality while still blowing away any other standalone devices on the market.
I'm all for it. Particularly tethering the VP to an iPhone. Not only saves on cost of goods, since we all have iPhones (hopefully), but in addition takes off some weight off the head and neck. If they don't offset it with the larger lenses.
Apple are also charging international customers more for the same product.
A straight conversion of $3500 USD to AUD would be around A$5250. But Apple are charging $5999. Even if you deduct 10% GST, it's still A$5340.
It's also interesting that you can't even start the purchase/configuration process for an AVP to explore pricing unless you already own an iPhone with FaceID. Is it a stand-alone product or not?
It’s almost like these rumor sources don't actually know.
Well tax included in my province would be $5,750. No bonus lens, no bonus case, no Apple Care.
What about the front display? They are going to ditch that for the cheaper model, right…? Because it’s a cost and bulk adding gimmick that literally no one needs.
The IPhone is for measuring your face. They don’t have another standard way for you too do that yourself. You don’t have to have an iPhone to operate Vision Pro.
Why do you need to measure your face just to explore the costs/specs of a Vision Pro? Surely that process could come last, not be a barrier to even looking into a Vision Pro.
If you don't own an iPhone, or you have one without FaceID, you cannot even consider purchasing a Vision Pro. The face scan is mandatory before you can even see any prices or tech specs, which means you must have an iPhone to be able to operate a Vision Pro since it is not possible to purchase one without it.
A cheaper, lower quality, version of the AVP that already isn't selling, seemingly has no real useful or compelling purpose nor seems to be of any mainstream interest?
Goodness Apple
Can this thing
Goodness Apple
Can this thing
