Apple Reportedly Suspends Work on Vision Pro 2

[Surf Monkey]

Media might hype it up like that, but even at that price I believe actual consumers would still feel not like it's a must-have, unless they don't own a computer at all. Would they be more inclined to buy it at that price than at $3500? Yes. Would it be a smash hit? I doubt it. But assuming that the same exact AVP as currently exists does fly off the shelves at $500, I think the people who bought them would probably not end up using them very much.

If I was buying something primarily for watching movies, I'd rather get a 65" 4K TV for $300 to $500.

Media consumption on the device is a good experience, no doubt. I’ve used the Quest to watch movies and it’s great, with a few caveats. The Vision fixes some of the issues around watching movies, but as I mentioned above, watching movies in a VR space is a VERY isolated and solitary activity. Even ignoring the fact that most people consider movies and TV to be communal experiences that they share with friends and family, the idea that average consumers would even CONSIDER this system for that main purpose strikes me as silly. A system you have to put your head in, can’t share, makes you look dumb, leaves you disheveled and disoriented after using it… or a top of the line 4k monitor that you can accurately calibrate for color, dynamic range and contrast, that doesn’t require you to put your head inside it to use it, can be easily shared with your family, doesn’t have any impact on how you look and feel after using it and have money left over. Is there really any decision there? For the vast majority there isn’t.

It needs more. Media consumption isn’t the killer app. It delivers an experience that’s better in some respects but critically flawed in others.

 

[theskog]

Well this will make a lot of people happy.

Instead of a $3,500 AVP2, they can get a AV for $1,500 or less.

This move will definitely get more people using them since the price was out of a lot of people’s reach.

The problem is if you have a family of four and you want this to be truly immersive for the whole bunch, that’s still $6000. You can get four Macs for less than that.

I think in order to get this right, Apple needs to make the Vision Pro cost as much as a nice living room TV + $100 to cover up to four people. Otherwise, it’s just a Trekkie’s gimmick.

 

[theskog]

Buy a Mac.

Microsoft has had window snapping since vista, and oddly enough, so has Linux. Apple needs to stop becoming the loser like they have the past ten years.

 

[theskog]

Still waiting for someone to show me a compelling use case for increased productivity, or basically anything beyond media consumption for the average consumer. It’s a dud, and we didn’t have to “wait for it to come out and actually see it” to know this.

Exactly! Everyone here seems to be brainwashed, and that’s coming from a former employee(me). It’s a ******* product.

 

[theskog]

Here’s the painful reality: Apple could give these away for free and it still wouldn’t be a mainstream success. People aren’t generally willing to wear a big heavy headset over their faces to do stuff they can already do with an iPad.

Exactly! People are too obsessed with copying technology they’ve seen in sci-fi movies.

 

[theskog]

Spatial computing, in the case of Apple, is marketing. Nothing more.

Yea. This dude from before stating a definition of spatial computing is a common college “thinker’s” response, aka a bot

 

[theskog]

The price tag is obviously a big barrier but the bigger issue is no compelling use case. No matter how much Tim Cook thinks spacial computing is a big deal the average consumer is never going to wear big bulky googles for consumption or productivity. This product was always going to be a very niche product.

Nah, it’s the price. I promise you, for $99, people would give this iPod-level mainstream success.

 

[JapanApple]

I think you’re making all the right points, but some just enjoy disagreeing.
Many of us who actually own a Vision Pro have stopped posting in these types of articles because of this.
If my Vision Pro were stolen, I’d buy a new one tomorrow and, for whatever reason, that enjoyment of a product really bothers some.

You bring valuable facts, too bad the people causing problematic posts with no value. The point is if it's gone you buy it again without thought. The reason why you want to buy it. If you have this much passion for it. That it's worth the cost. Nice post.
BTW people buy what they want.

 

[laz232]

It's not atypical for dramatic strategical changes to happen like this. The price needs to be dropped fast for adoption to become mainstream. Apple did the same* with the iPhone (1st generation) and iPhone 3G.

iPhone (1st generation)'s price was dropped* within months. https://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/05/8gb-iphone-price-drop-4gb-iphone-discontinued/

And iPhone 3G started at $199*. A lot of upgrades were left out for it to focus dropping the price.

* UPDATE: I want to correct and state that the price was subsidized by carriers, but customers saw a decreased upfront cost which was effective in increasing adoption.

The difference is that everyone saw the use-case for phones. Mobile phones - were getting pretty sophisticated back then (I was listening to podcasts, checking email, using maps and taking photos with my Nokia N79).
I could buy the current Apple headset, but no idea what I would use it for (apart from a few hours of novelty)!
Making it half price I still wouldn't know!
In my professional life, I could come up with some uses - but I also know it would use as much time to set up as I would save.

 

[drumcat]

Same comment from me. They need to have HDMI in, or capture through USB-C, or I have zero interest.

 

[AF_APPLETALK]

Apple PLEASE put a pico projector into the HomePod and load visionOS onto it! Please!! I'll buy like three or four without hesitation!

 

[gpat]

Vision is on life support.

They should focus on making iPadOS more Mac-like, in terms of file management (format disks eject disks), window management (free form window management with more than 4 windows on any given ‘stage’, with the traffic lights 🚥 for window control. Also window snapping like what they just brought to sequoia. Mission Control as well for finding open windows. ), virtualization (run macOS or windows or Linux from iPad).

With the m4 chip, a more capable iPadOS would likely spur more sales at this particular point in time than another vision device. There’s a lot of pent up demand for a more capable iPadOS.

"Life support"? Come on. More like "Maternity ward".
Agree on iPadOS though.

 

[mode11]

Have you used it? If you dig through my profile, I've called it a meme, laughed about it and was a total non-believer. But then I used it. It's an amazing device and have had the most incredible experiences with technology with it.

Sounds like an awesome afternoon.

 

[mode11]

Apple knows what they are doing. The iPhone and Apple Watch evolved and matured over 8 generations. This is only Generation 1 of the headset. 8 years from now this headset will have evolved physically and software wise. It will take time, but will get there

The iPhone created a lot of excitement straight away, and was a huge success within a couple of generations. The Apple Watch doesn't have the same level of adoption, though found a niche with fitness tracking early on and now pretty much owns the smartwatch market (such as it is).

VR goggles have been around for years and have never broken through. They're in the same bracket as 3D films and the Kinect / Wii - cool for a couple of hours before the novelty wears off.

If AVP was a pair of contact lenses, it would be a smash hit. Unfortunately, no one will be interested at any stage of its miniaturisation, until it hits the size / weight / transparency of a pair of glasses.

 

[mode11]

Nothing ever good comes from me posting on this forum but whatever.

Vision Pro is a great 1st-gen product held back by its price. An Apple tale as old as time. This news makes perfect sense given its reception and how the execs were talking about Vision Pro publicly during WWDC.

Now they learn how it gets used, how to market it, who's buying it, and where to aim next. Calling it a failure/prepped for cancellation/the final nail in Apple's coffin is so weird, like are you new? Can you really not differentiate your bizarre big tech fanboy feud desires from reality?

Like yes you should be mad you cannot own one. Everyone should. It's priced exorbitantly and I really think Apple was genuinely taken back by even well-off tech employees scoffing at the price. But now they adjust.

I think a lot of people assume Apple products always follow the trajectory of the iPhone. Unfortunately for Apple and the tech industry, this is type of thing is a once in a generation occurrence. The iPhone at launch was thought to be quite expensive (though nothing close to the AVP's price), but had a lot of buzz. By the 3GS it was popular and mainstream, with an App Store and cheap subsidised contracts.

They're gonna let Vision Pro 1 ride out for another few years to let the cost of components go down so they can price drop it because the tech holds up. The only big performance issue it had was hand tracking being 30fps and they just fixed it in VisionOS 2. They're not gonna focus on big, graphically intensive games obv. Battery life is good and people figured out how to use either of the head straps. It doesn't actively hurt people anymore lol.

Vision "Lite" is a great next step. I feel like $1799 is their sweet spot because they definitely lean on the "$/per month" installments to sell their more expensive products now and $149/month will sound great to tech bros. STILL TOO EXPENSIVE for what it is, but once Adobe Lightroom launches on it, 3d modelling software, and other creative-focused tools, it'll be a great sell to upper-middle class.

Unformatted of things to make it cheaper:

• They're gonna keep the same screens and cameras, so:
• Just axe the front screen.
• Make it soft, diffused color LED array like homepod mini.
• Hopefully they could get to fanless thermals with newer M chips.
• One headband only in box.
• no front cover in box (cuz no more screen/glass).
• manual eye distance adjustment with like a knob or something.
• ********/no speakers (rely on airpods instead).
• a single adjustable face mount pad thing rather than all of the crazy R&D and production that went into all the specific sizes and sizing needed for the current fitting system.
• no over-engineered side bands (that house the speakers with secret data connection lighting port things).
• ******** battery (that doesn't have like internal motion-detecting components to know when to blink the LED when moved).
• less microphones.

And then sweeten the deal with accessories like VR game controllers or apple pencil support somehow ("draw on any surface!") or a portable keyboard/magic trackpad combo.

Some features could perhaps be trimmed if it turns out they don't contribute much, but the major expense will be the screens and the processing. The screens still need a much wider field of view, and improvements to resolution and refresh rate are always welcome. The goal is to be visually transparent - as if you were looking at reality through your own eyes, with graphics 'magically' appearing on top.

But as others have pointed out, cost is not the major obstacle. There's not hordes of people drooling over the AVP, wishing they could afford it. It needs a clear use case, a vast reduction in size / weight and probably fundamentally different technology.

Like Vision Pro is so obviously such a over-engineered, aimed-towards-luxury product. Like it being over-engineered is a part of its selling point as a "futuristic" product. Yet SOOOO many "normal" people would love it for the media/entertainment consumption aspect alone, so I'm sure the goal would be to get it down to even $899 in half a decade.

The goal of the AVP is not to be a luxury product. The idea is to create an AR experience that can be used as a benchmark. The technology for creating opaque graphics on transparent surfaces doesn't currently exist, so the current workaround is to use very high quality screens to show graphics on a live video feed. This is a bulky approximation of what would actually have appeal - AR glasses / contact lenses - using the technology available today. The problem is that even if great apps are created for this current 'AR simulator', there's a giant and perhaps insurmountable leap required to get to the 'endgame' hardware that people would actually want to buy / use.

They had to sell the $17,000 18 karat gold Apple Watch, and even the $1300 ceramic version after, to get the ball rolling for the rest of us.

Erm, no. The gold / ceramic watches were experiments to find the upper limit of what they could charge in a new category. That they were duds was no skin off Apple's nose. What actually got the ball rolling was the Watch finding a niche in fitness tracking.

Cuz I feel like the one time they gave up on a launched product that didn't make sense to me (and still doesnt) was Airport routers. And Vision doesn't feel like that. Apple still hates Meta and they're gonna want to win.

I liked the Airport routers too, but Apple gave up on them (as with printers before) when they decided there was little opportunity to add value (and hence margin) over the competition. Apple isn't motivated by hatred of Meta; they will only continue to pursue AR / VR if the 'metaverse' seems like it will become the next frontier of computing (which thankfully seems unlikely).

 

[ninecows]

This is something that is overlooked in the discussion about the AVP. The amount the average person can spend on electronic devices for work, communication and entertainment is limited. The AVP is not going to replace the Mac for work or an iPhone. I don't think there is enough budget for this very expensive gadget that only solves a very narrow use case. The situation gets even worse when you have to take into account the needs of your spouse and kids, who might not earn their own income yet.

I agree... at the current price point it's not for ordinary folks. We (located in Denmark so not easily comparable) have a fairly high income, well above the median of our country. When we decide to buy some electronic gadget and it's priced at ~1% of our annual income before taxes, then we consider it a fairly big investment and not something we just carelessly do for fun. I know that having the latest gadget means more to some than others, so YMMV 🤷🏼‍♂️

Looking at the income distribution in the US it seems that for 90% of the population, the AVP will cost at least 2% of their annual household income. For the median it's much worse at a whopping 5% of the household income!

Unless the AVP can provide some amazing boost to my quality of life (which it cannot currently), that puts it very clearly in the no-go category.

I think putting the AVP out there was a brave and ambitious move by apple. Probably also too brave if it was actually meant to generate profit in the first iteration. But could be that they have the extra cash stashed away somewhere that they can just burn off on trying out new tech like this.

 

[czoli]

They should stop selling it and keep working on it internally

The form factor and hardware aren't close to being at mass appeal level

You need to get a first gen out

1. to get developers on board which, with a new category, takes time (the first Iphone did not even have an App Store!)
2. to evolve the platform by gathering the real feedback
3. to understand which are the use cases

If you do not sell it and keep it in the lab then you miss out.

They got the RnD, they got lots of money, they shall continue.

Clearly the mass market success will come with a product that will be quite different, in shape, form, price and functionalities compared to this first-gen / POC / showcase product.

I suspect that they perhaps expected a warmer reaction from the market but I do not think they are fools either and they know what they are trying to do.

 

[Col4bin]

Version one is the foundation. Version 2 and beyond are the consumer refined models. Eventually, there will be a couple models and possibly an SE model for entry level/general consumer AR glasses.

This was always the plan. The fortune 1000 and Governments are the foundation model target markets.

Probably correct, but not with the current form factor, hardware, software, and pricing structure. It could take another decade or so to get there.

 

[mode11]

You need to get a first gen out

1. to get developers on board which, with a new category, takes time (the first Iphone did not even have an App Store!)
2. to evolve the platform by gathering the real feedback
3. to understand which are the use cases

If you do not sell it and keep it in the lab then you miss out.

They got the RnD, they got lots of money, they shall continue.

Clearly the mass market success will come with a product that will be quite different, in shape, form, price and functionalities compared to this first-gen / POC / showcase product.

I suspect that they perhaps expected a warmer reaction from the market but I do not think they are fools either and they know what they are trying to do.

In general that's true of technology. Apple didn't know what the Apple Watch was for when they released it, even trying to sell it as a Rolex competitor (bizarrely; can you imagine the value / battery life of a gen 1 AW at this point?). It was the fitness enthusiasts that ultimately saw value in it.

The problem with the AVP is that the end game is not a lighter / cheaper AVP. It will be a fundamentally different solution to AR. The issue with this is that it's betting on a radically different technology coming to market in the near future. If it doesn't, then the pioneering work of the AVP goes nowhere and fizzles out.

At the moment, it's like a prototype jetpack coming out that costs $50K and has 2 minutes of fuel. But hoping to prepare the way for a future where we all wizz around on gravity-repelling hoverboards. It's too big a leap.

 

[Mr_Ed]

Watching a movie on the AVP in theater mode on my couch is an unbelievable experience.

Taking it off and looking at my 65” 4K TV, it felt like a toy. No comparison.

But a solitary one.



Your TV felt like a toy?

I concede that some may find this way of consuming movies and TV “interesting,” but I rarely do those things alone. The isolated nature of AVP (or any other headset) in this use case makes it a non-starter for many of us.

Beyond that, there are the practical aspects of everything that happens when I watch media. I eat, I drink, I sit or lie on the couch in whatever position I feel at that moment, pause the media to go to the kitchen or bathroom. All of those simple little things seem especially awkward while wearing a computer on your face.

Can you do a lot of those things with your AVP on if you really want to? Sure. Do I want to “learn” new ways to deal with these simple tasks? Nope. Not worth it.

 

[david.olstein]

Media consumption on the device is a good experience, no doubt. I’ve used the Quest to watch movies and it’s great, with a few caveats. The Vision fixes some of the issues around watching movies, but as I mentioned above, watching movies in a VR space is a VERY isolated and solitary activity. Even ignoring the fact that most people consider movies and TV to be communal experiences that they share with friends and family, the idea that average consumers would even CONSIDER this system for that main purpose strikes me as silly. A system you have to put your head in, can’t share, makes you look dumb, leaves you disheveled and disoriented after using it… or a top of the line 4k monitor that you can accurately calibrate for color, dynamic range and contrast, that doesn’t require you to put your head inside it to use it, can be easily shared with your family, doesn’t have any impact on how you look and feel after using it and have money left over. Is there really any decision there? For the vast majority there isn’t.

It needs more. Media consumption isn’t the killer app. It delivers an experience that’s better in some respects but critically flawed in others.

As an owner and user of an Apple Vision Pro, I couldn't disagree more strongly with this post.

I still watch movies in theater. And while my experience of watching 2D movies on the Vision Pro can't quite match the experience of watching movies in a Dolby Cinema or IMAX theater, it does come close. And it is far superior to anything I could expect from a home theater set-up. Even if i were inclined to install a 4K projector, a 120" screen and a Dolby Atmos speaker system in my apartment I could never listen to it at reference levels. My neigbors would never stand for that. And watching 3D movies on the Vision Pro beats any 3D viewing experience I've had in the theaters.

As for watching movies being a communal experience, I wonder whether Surf Monkey as been to a movie theater lately. I've had many movies ruined by the people around me, who rather than watching the movie decided to talk throughout the film or text on their phones. And the fact is, I live by myself. A lot of people do. And my apartment is too small for entertaining. So watching movies at home is going to be a solitary experience, whether I'm watching it on a TV or on a Vision Pro.

After using my Vision Pro for a few months, media consumption is the one thing it does exceptionally well in my experience. I expected it would, and while it's not perfect -- glare is still a problem for me -- I havent' been disappointed. The other potentially compelling use case for the Vision Pro in may opinion is as a substitute for a large screen monintor -- or even a full computer system substitute -- when traveling. But that's not going to happen - at least for me -- until they have a virtual keyboard I can use as easily as a real one.

 

[mode11]

As an owner and user of an Apple Vision Pro, I couldn't disagree more strongly with this post.

I still watch movies in theater. And while my experience of watching 2D movies on the Vision Pro can't quite match the experience of watching movies in a Dolby Cinema or IMAX theater, it does come close. And it is far superior to anything I could expect from a home theater set-up. Even if i were inclined to install a 4K projector, a 120" screen and a Dolby Atmos speaker system in my apartment I could never listen to it at reference levels. My neigbors would never stand for that. And watching 3D movies on the Vision Pro beats any 3D viewing experience I've had in the theaters.

As for watching movies being a communal experience, I wonder whether Surf Monkey as been to a movie theater lately. I've had many movies ruined by the people around me, who rather than watching the movie decided to talk throughout the film or text on their phones. And the fact is, I live by myself. A lot of people do. And my apartment is too small for entertaining. So watching movies at home is going to be a solitary experience, whether I'm watching it on a TV or on a Vision Pro.

After using my Vision Pro for a few months, media consumption is the one thing it does exceptionally well in my experience. I expected it would, and while it's not perfect -- glare is still a problem for me -- I havent' been disappointed. The other potentially compelling use case for the Vision Pro in may opinion is as a substitute for a large screen monintor -- or even a full computer system substitute -- when traveling. But that's not going to happen - at least for me -- until they have a virtual keyboard I can use as easily as a real one.

I don't dispute anything in your post, but it seems from your comments and others that the virtual movie theatre is the one current 'killer app' for the AVP. But doesn't that essentially just make it a fancy Olympus Eye-Trek? Or Quest, for that matter.

 

[turbineseaplane]

You need to get a first gen out

1. to get developers on board which, with a new category, takes time (the first Iphone did not even have an App Store!)
2. to evolve the platform by gathering the real feedback
3. to understand which are the use cases

If you do not sell it and keep it in the lab then you miss out.

When the first gen is this bad, number 1 isn’t going to happen and number 3 they should’ve known already because this is not even close to a new space

 

[david.olstein]

I don't dispute anything in your post, but it seems from your comments and others that the virtual movie theatre is the one current 'killer app' for the AVP. But doesn't that essentially just make it a fancy Olympus Eye-Trek? Or Quest, for that matter.

I'm not famliar with the Olympus Eye-Trek, and haven't used the Quest. So I can't comment on either of those devices. I do think it's fair to characterize the Apple Vision Pro as a state of the art personal home theater device. That sounds a little more impressive. But I'd stand by that characterization. Personally, I'm willing to pay $5000 for that. Most people aren't. So if Apple wants this product line to succeed, they're going to have to figure out a way to provide a roughly comparable experience at a fraction of the cost. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But either way, I don't regret my decision to purchase an Apple Vision Pro.

In addition to the Apple Vision Pro, I have a Mac Mini, a Macbook Pro, an iPad Pro, and iPhone and an Apple Watch. I use them all. And for each device, I can think of at least one thing that device does better than all of the others. In the case of the Apple Vision Pro, it is - in my opinion - the best device for watching video content and for listening to Spatial Audio. And probably the best for viewing my photo collection, although frankly I haven't done that at lot. But for other uses -- FaceTime, messaging, email, browsing the internet, creating/editing documents - there's another device that works better for me.

 

[turbineseaplane]

the best device for watching video content and for listening to Spatial Audio

Maybe for watching video by yourself

And for Spatial Audio .. why is it better than Apple headphones of some kind?