Apple Likely Planning to Use Bigger, Lower Resolution Displays for Cheaper Vision Headset

[mac-imperator]

In years to come, people will be singing version one as the superior AR headset but it's price... blah blah blah. Listen, I want a Porsche GT3 RS, but I can't afford one, does that mean that they should make a cheaper version that I can afford? Hell no! Sometimes we can't get what we want so you just gotta move on and look for another device that you can afford. Will it be as good as Apple's? Probably not, but hey you have one that you can afford.

 

[andyuk222]

Dear Apple
We need the following:
1. Better resolution (not worse)
2. Cheaper
3. Lighter

Untill you can tick all those boxes, just dont bother. Work on other tech untill each of those boxes is ticked. Its really not difficult to understand Timmy.

 

[timber]

It's understandable that Apple seeks lower cost parts but one of the few use cases the Vision Pro currently sort of has is as a super Mac display and that does require high resolution.

Without resolution there is one movies/tv/streaming left.

 

[thekeyring]

A discussion point on The Talk Show was that the "non-Retina" Apple headset wasn't worth making, and was why other headsets aren't making much headway.

For instance the Meta Quest is apparently quite painful to read on, where as you can comfortable read a web page or an email on Apple Vision Pro.

This rumour makes it sounds like there is room for lower resolution before you get into Meta Quest territory where it's no good as a general all-purpose computer.

 

[thekeyring]

Dear Apple
We need the following:
1. Better resolution (not worse)
2. Cheaper
3. Lighter

Untill you can tick all those boxes, just dont bother. Work on other tech untill each of those boxes is ticked. Its really not difficult to understand Timmy.

How many trillion-dollar companies do you run?

How many "macrumours newbie"s exist just to hate on Apple?

 

[Amazing Iceman]

“There’s $3,500 worth of tech in the Vision Pro, but not $3,500 worth of value for the mass consumer, at least not yet."

This best represents the state of Vision Pro right now. Does it need to be 4K for consumers to appreciate spatial computing? The answer is probably no. Setting the minimum experience at 4K doesn't help if consumers can't appreciate it, especially if there's no killer app and nobody can afford the device. This is similar to 5G vs 4G iPhone. Is it necessary to have 5G for iPhone to succeed?

RFI asks suppliers for their capabilities, pricing range, manufacturing capacity. It wouldn't make sense for Apple to ask for a lower resolution display if they weren't interested in that direction.

There’s people who don’t see the difference between HD and 4K.
And people who don’t see the benefit of a 75” TV versus a 32” TV. So there’s a market for small low resolution TVs, but you don’t see the big brands focused on that market, just like Apple may not be interested in focusing on a lower spec Apple Vision that would be criticized to the max and give them bad publicity.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

It’s not the cost that’s stopping me, it’s the fact I hate VR as much as that ridiculous face mask.

There are other reasons why people look ridiculous without having to wear an AVP, such as those who claim to hate VR just because they can’t afford it.
Just like some people claim to “hate” the Tesla Cybertruck because of its looks.
I would simply say I don’t like how it looks, but that doesn’t mean I “hate” it.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

I don’t see VP, under any work scenario, being more efficient or cheaper than a normal workstation and 2 or 3 basic monitors.

Well, if you do your research you will find it.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

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.

That would be a completely different product category.
There’s no immersive experience if there’s light coming from all directions.

 

[gpat]

There’s people who don’t see the difference between HD and 4K.
And people who don’t see the benefit of a 75” TV versus a 32” TV. So there’s a market for small low resolution TVs, but you don’t see the big brands focused on that market, just like Apple may not be interested in focusing on a lower spec Apple Vision that would be criticized to the max and give them bad publicity.

Low res on a screen is quite different from low res on a headset.

I can use without problems my 27" 1440p display at work, it's perfect for productivity, but can't say the same about my Xreal Air that lay unutilized on the bottom of my drawer.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

Low res on a screen is quite different from low res on a headset.

I can use without problems my 27" 1440p display at work, it's perfect for productivity, but can't say the same about my Xreal Air that lay unutilized on the bottom of my drawer.

It all depends on how you use your device. A tablet-size display is small compared to a 26” monitor, but it has a lot of advantages being portable.

A 27” monitor at 1440P resolution may be great for gaming but not for programmers, designers or publishers, who see the benefit of having a higher PPI display.
If you can live with a lower PPI, that’s your perspective, not the perspective of many others.
Some people are happy driving a compact vehicle while others prefer a SUV or a truck. It all depends on what they need it for.

 

[lilkwarrior]

I don’t see VP, under any work scenario, being more efficient or cheaper than a normal workstation and 2 or 3 basic monitors.

…Under any working scenario? I would say that’s immediately false for work that need to be done on-the-go, continued in work cafes, and work that needs to be private as possible around you (or just don’t want people that noisy into what you’re working on like need-to-know information involving unreleased files).

The Vision Pro for creative engineering is also invaluable for responsive layouts and to use native creative apps like unit conversion tools alongside mirrored Macs and cross-platform creative work.

All in all, I’d say you’re naive to say “any” working scenario.

It’s professionally and generally not wise to speak in absolute language about productivity—it’s unnecessary comes across as arbitrary gate-keeping.

Sort of like people who claim prosumer GPUs aren’t used by professionals like creative professionals, AI researchers, and game devs don’t exist

 

[_apple_apple_]

I was just thinking the other day that apple could probably use lens to compress the light from lower-resolution displays to achieve a desired perceptual resolution. Sort of like a reverse magnifying glass.

 

[CapitalIdea]

Why didn’t they release this one first for people to get an introduction into VR, getting them hooked and then release a better product with people always wanting the latest and greatest.

Now they have already alienated a lot of people with this unreachable price and not wanting something „inferior“ either

Because they targeted professionals in production to start to lay the groundwork for content and apps. They have never aimed for the downmarket segment.

 

[UltimaKilo]

In years to come, people will be singing version one as the superior AR headset but it's price... blah blah blah. Listen, I want a Porsche GT3 RS, but I can't afford one, does that mean that they should make a cheaper version that I can afford? Hell no! Sometimes we can't get what we want so you just gotta move on and look for another device that you can afford. Will it be as good as Apple's? Probably not, but hey you have one that you can afford.

This is why Apple should not have rushed this product to soothe Cook’s ego. The space is definitely the future, and has the ability to replace the iPhone someday.

I follow the space closely, along with the technology behind it and it’s simply not there , nor will it be, before 2027 at the absolute earliest.

•33% reduction in weight
•Real PASS-THROUGH AR, not this camera crap
•An FOV of at least 140 degrees vertical and horizontal
•144hz panels
•Sub $1300 price
•A SoC capable of running all this efficiently (years away from existing)

I’m being optimistic when I say 2027, this kind of tech, particularly the pass-through and larger FOV without warping, is more likely to not be commercially viable until possibly closer to 2029.

 

[darngooddesign]

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.

You dont.

If you don't own an iPhone, or you have one without FaceID, you cannot even consider purchasing a Vision Pro.

Buy Apple Vision Pro

Shop Apple Vision Pro and sign up for an in-store demo. Meet with a Specialist one on one. Or shop with a Specialist over video.

www.apple.com

The face scan is mandatory before you can even see any prices or tech specs,

Apple Vision Pro - Technical Specifications

View all technical specifications for Apple Vision Pro.

www.apple.com

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.

Buy Apple Vision Pro

Shop Apple Vision Pro and sign up for an in-store demo. Meet with a Specialist one on one. Or shop with a Specialist over video.

www.apple.com

 

[GrayFlannel]

If your use case is something like watching movies, or sports, how does “efficiency” come into play? We’re taking qualitative vs quantitative here.

Why would you be watching a movie while at work? Take a moment to read the post you quoted again. That should clear it up.

 

[darngooddesign]

They could just let people play with the tech configurations and see the prices on the website. Put the face scan last and if people can't complete it, direct them to an Apple Store.

As the website is currently set up, the face fitting comes first and there is no way to see or change the configurations or prices without first completing the iPhone step.

You dont need a face scan to see the specs and pricing.

 

[GrayFlannel]

Well, if you do your research you will find it.

Can you help me with an example?

 

[darngooddesign]

There are other reasons why people look ridiculous without having to wear an AVP, such as those who claim to hate VR just because they can’t afford it.

Regular VR headsets aren’t particularly expensive anymore so claimaing the dislike is due to “cant afford it” is a lazy, inaccurate argument.

Just like some people claim to “hate” the Tesla Cybertruck because of its looks.
I would simply say I don’t like how it looks, but that doesn’t mean I “hate” it.

The CyberTruck is bad because it sucks in even mild off-road situations, has multiple compromises due to its design, and it really isn’t a very good truck.

 

[GrayFlannel]

…Under any working scenario? I would say that’s immediately false for work that need to be done on-the-go, continued in work cafes, and work that needs to be private as possible around you (or just don’t want people that noisy into what you’re working on like need-to-know information involving unreleased files).

The Vision Pro for creative engineering is also invaluable for responsive layouts and to use native creative apps like unit conversion tools alongside mirrored Macs and cross-platform creative work.

All in all, I’d say you’re naive to say “any” working scenario.

It’s professionally and generally not wise to speak in absolute language about productivity—it’s unnecessary comes across as arbitrary gate-keeping.

Sort of like people who claim prosumer GPUs aren’t used by professionals like creative professionals, AI researchers, and game devs don’t exist

I will double down on saying there no work scenario where the VP is more efficient than the current standard devices such as a workstation and additional monitors. One example might be surgical but that is such a small niche use it hardly worth mentioning.

 

[Rychiar]

Ok, so does lower PPI and larger size mean it will end up with the same resolution, just less magnified by the lenses? Or will the quality be worse, also?

Why would it be cheaper if it wasn’t worse…

 

[Rychiar]

This product was DOA. Way overpriced and completely irrelevant to most people’s needs. Another failed category by Apple. Stick to phones, computers and AirPods.

That’s called having no “vision” of the future. It’s truly a device that shows what’s coming and the only exciting new “innovation” they’ve had in years

 

[Rychiar]

Yep. I’m still not working with a headset pressed tightly against face for hours. That’s not happening.

And once again the movies look great. But you’ll quickly lose interest doing that. Not worth the discomfort. Hard to drink or eat. Or share. And you look like you’ve been in a wreck afterwards.

Get a large screen oled and hang on wall. Much better.

I haven’t lost interest at all in the last 5 months. In fact I’m watching even more movies and tv in it and get excited for what Apple TV drops as free every month. I even rent new movies which I never did before on digital . It’s even exciting to rewatch old favorites on it

 

[Karma*Police]

Problem is, lower price for a worse product doesn’t necessarily make it a commercial success.

One of the distinct advantages of AVP is its resolution, and what that enables.

Yeah at that point why not just get a meta quest. It’ll still likely be much cheaper with a much bigger library of apps with real games thanks to its physical controls.