Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Reveals 'Vision Pro' Headset and visionOS

DeepIn2U said:
ABSOLUTELY NO mention of the Digital Crown as an innovative user UI ... was there some BAD blood between him and Jony Ive?! Hmmm. yes the Digital Crown was mentioned yet only for its existence and specific 2 point purpose of being there.
Click to expand...
The Vision Pro's use of the digital crown, as I currently understand it, is mainly for expanding and contracting the size of the image you see, and while this is a new use for it (previously it's controlled only audio functions in Apple's AirPods Max, various selection options on the Apple Watch, etc.), this isn't the main innovative feature of the Vision Pro's UI--the major part of the UI is its use of multiple cameras to monitor the user's hand and eye movements, allowing those movements to select, control, etc. what's seen on the Vision Pro's screens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
DeepIn2U said:
Finally got to watch the keynote and noticed a few things:

"I've been waiting a long time for this."
"I believe that AR ... "
Tim Cook's SPECIFIC words ... not "We Believe that AR" but "I believe" so this is a VERY personal project endeavour by Tim and he's staking his claim - if nobody hasn't noticed but to the industry that THIS is HIS Apple now and forever.

The first person to kick off Apple Vision Pro is Alan Dye.
paraphrasing here 'Every major product category by Apple has been led by an innovative user interface. The Macintosh, it was the mouse, the iPod, it was the click-wheel, and iPhone Multi-Touch.'

ABSOLUTELY NO mention of the Digital Crown as an innovative user UI ... was there some BAD blood between him and Jony Ive?! Hmmm. yes the Digital Crown was mentioned yet only for its existence and specific 2 point purpose of being there. That's harsh!

This ... ignoring the great introductions and creations of executives of the past that have CLEARLY LED Apple a the industry and done Apple users and fans great is CHEAP, CHILDISH and ignorant! It started with Forestall regarding Apple Maps: yet COMPLETELY ignored his major contribution of iOS based on OS X and the complete maniacal focus for icon clarity and depth on iPhoneOS -to-iOS to ENSURE iOS didn't look like a cheap second, third, or fourth rate knock off (Android, Windows Mobile 7, and any other failed OS before it: BeOS, S60/UIQ - Symbian-based OS', JavaOS, etc), along with Time Machine (a function that even Windows 11 STILL doesn't have, nor Windows Server built-in), iPadOS as well. Then here today (or yesterday technically) its again Jony Ive!

Jony Ive brought us:
20TH Anniversary Mac (a future design that led to the LCD based iMac's)
iMac OG and every iteration including and up to the iMac Pro!
PowerBook G4 Titanium and G4 Aluminum series.
PolyCarbonite iBook,
MacBook Pro 2008 onward to 2016-2019 generation.
iPod,
iPhone ... up to iPhone 11 (I think): the 4/4S, 5/5S amongst the best of the design's from him. The 12-14 homage to those.
iPad and iPad Pro design that STILL have his design template!
PowerMac G3, G4, G5,
Mac Pro to the current design.

Whose contributions will be next to be ignored I wonder.
Click to expand...
Yeah right, they’re ignoring Jony Ive by mentioning iPod and iPhone and literally including Digital Crown on the Vision Pro? I don’t see it.

By the way who knows if Ive was involved or not? Could be.
 
steveballmer said:
Well I've been one of those kinds of professionals for 25 years. And my Dad is bigger than your Dad. My hubris detectors are pinging hard. We don't have long to wait to find out whether that frantic, flapping sound is your pride before a fall.
Click to expand...
I rarely do color-critical graphics-related work anymore, sadly (at least at work). But I could see the use case for the Vision Pro in that space. Sometimes you just need more high quality screen real estate.

In my current role, I have to say using the Vision Pro as an external display would be huge for me. People have a bad habit of touching my monitors at work, leaving greasy fingerprints all over the place. And periodically the cleaning crew gets it into their heads to "clean" the the monitors, leaving them all streaky and no better than when they're covered with fingerprints. If I can have all (or more) of the display space of my monitors with no fingerprints or smudges, that's huge right there. Let people run their hands all over the physical monitors when they need to look at something on my screens. I can enjoy a pristine AR screen again when they leave.

Privacy is huge too. I work a lot with personal information, so I'm often either changing Spaces or using a hotcorner to lock the computer when I have someone in my office. For that matter, I won't work while flying.

Normally at work I have two large monitors plus my laptop screen. But when working from home I just have one external monitor plus the laptop. And when traveling, it's just the laptop by itself. This becomes quite limiting.

Using Vision Pro as a display seems like the perfect privacy solution and the solution for additional screen real estate, addressing all of these situations. That's assuming it doesn't have too much latency or other issues that would prevent these uses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert, zync and steveballmer
I have questions

1. Who is the target group ? (those who want it, can't afford it, those who can afford it, don't want it)
2. What is the key-feature (use case) for this product ?

In its current state The product will not succeed. If it is 40% of the price and the hardware is smaller (not something that's doable right now), then it will sell like hotcakes.

I know a few who have bought the Oculus Quest, and when they have walked the line on the board above skyscrapers, it ends up on the shelf collecting dust.

As of right now, it's purely gimmick, nothing that this product can do, is simpler to do, than already available on much cheaper products.

Remember the 3D flatscreens ?, they only needed lightweight glasses, and nobody uses it anymore. Why?, because reasons 😛
 
  • Like
Reactions: Surf Monkey
Surf Monkey said:
Curious lack of a sense of irony you’ve cultivated. Exceptionally defensive too.
Click to expand...
Yet more word salad. I note you never did acknowledge that when you look at your living room through a camera, you can still see your living room. The camera does not obscure your field of vision. If it did, you wouldn't be able to see your living room. It would be obscured. By the camera. Be lucky.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Surf Monkey
steveballmer said:
Yet more word salad. I note you never did acknowledge that when you look at your living room through a camera, you can still see your living room. The camera does not obscure your field of vision. If it did, you wouldn't be able to see your living room. It would be obscured. By the camera. Be lucky.
Click to expand...

Your entire field of vision is encompassed by screens in the Vision Pro. You’re not looking at reality. You’re looking at reality mediated through a screen. That is NOT the same thing no matter how insulting and condescending you choose to be about it. No matter how much you complain, the essential fact remains: this device presents you with a video image of reality, not reality itself. Therefore the device is inherently more VR than AR. When you can show me a device with a CLEAR face panel, not an opaque screen, you’ll have a point. Until then you should just sit down and stop making a massive fool of yourself.
 
snowatom said:
I have questions

1. Who is the target group ? (those who want it, can't afford it, those who can afford it, don't want it)
2. What is the key-feature (use case) for this product ?

In its current state The product will not succeed. If it is 40% of the price and the hardware is smaller (not something that's doable right now), then it will sell like hotcakes.

I know a few who have bought the Oculus Quest, and when they have walked the line on the board above skyscrapers, it ends up on the shelf collecting dust.

As of right now, it's purely gimmick, nothing that this product can do, is simpler to do, than already available on much cheaper products.

Remember the 3D flatscreens ?, they only needed lightweight glasses, and nobody uses it anymore. Why?, because reasons 😛
Click to expand...
It’s a platform in the making that is not really launching yet looking at a) launch date early 2024 US only, b) Pro product name suggesting a small target audience and cheaper/simpler versions coming and c) we have yet to see what software will be available and what it will offer over current platforms.

But to get started you need developers and a working prototype. That’s what you have seen so far.

Spatial computing, a term that’s going to have to make sense to people. It’s going to take some time. I’d be worried if Apple didn’t have so much cash.
 
snowatom said:
I have questions

1. Who is the target group ? (those who want it, can't afford it, those who can afford it, don't want it)
2. What is the key-feature (use case) for this product ?

In its current state The product will not succeed. If it is 40% of the price and the hardware is smaller (not something that's doable right now), then it will sell like hotcakes.

I know a few who have bought the Oculus Quest, and when they have walked the line on the board above skyscrapers, it ends up on the shelf collecting dust.

As of right now, it's purely gimmick, nothing that this product can do, is simpler to do, than already available on much cheaper products.

Remember the 3D flatscreens ?, they only needed lightweight glasses, and nobody uses it anymore. Why?, because reasons 😛
Click to expand...

Bingo. A highly advanced version of a device that has struggled to attain anything close to wide spread adoption, let alone mass popular appeal. A device without a compelling reason to use and a MOUNTAIN of negatives and potential negatives.

I’d be thrilled to see Apple succeed in this endeavor but absolutely nothing about it inspires confidence that it will.
 
sunapple said:
It’s a platform in the making that is not really launching yet looking at a) launch date early 2024 US only, b) Pro product name suggesting a small target audience and cheaper/simpler versions coming and c) we have yet to see what software will be available and what it will offer over current platforms.

But to get started you need developers and a working prototype. That’s what you have seen so far.

Spatial computing, a term that’s going to have to make sense to people. It’s going to take some time. I’d be worried if Apple didn’t have so much cash.
Click to expand...

The exact same things companies have been saying about VR for over a decade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: exmophie
When the VisionPro presentation started I started guessing the retail price as they went along.
I started out at about 500-ish . . . . . upped it to 1000 whet they started showing what it could do.
The when they showed the lenses I upped it to 2000, after that the M1 and R1 came . . . I was like ??3000??.
When they showed the pricetag I started laughing out loud . . . . . never going to happen . . . . . .
Perhaps in a few years it will be a viable consumer product price wise . . .
This is going to be a niche product with a too low user base to be of interest to mainstream developers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zync and Surf Monkey
Tdude96 said:
The Microsoft HoloLens 2 is at the same price point as Vision Pro. I tried the HoloLens 2 before my company bought some sets and was impressed with the image quality, although I did not have the opportunity to try outside of a well-lit convention center, so can't say how well those handle low-light or sub-optimal situations. Nonetheless, I imagine Apple's device will be even better.

The other thing that impressed me was that the HoloLens didn't make me sick. It disoriented me at first, but I didn't feel ill, and quickly got over the disorientation. They were too heavy for comfort during extended use. 3D movies and cheap VR devices always make me feel ill almost instantly. Again, I anticipate Apple will also manage not to make me sick and reduce the amount of discomfort users might experience with extended wear.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen a few hands on reviews since my original comment and most have praised the image quality of the passthrough video, and only one mentioned seeing compression in the video and lack of detail in shadows. I’m much less skeptical on the cameras now, tho these people were also likely in a well lit space.

Also got me thinking that the killer app for this would be an entirely separate companion device. A 360 camera array you could place on that birthday table so you can be present and aware for your kid’s birthday without wearing a headset but still relive the memories later. Or remotely pull up a full environment live, rather than just floating boxes for FaceTime. Hopefully the headset can still act as a 3D camera when not being worn.
 
Surf Monkey said:
The exact same things companies have been saying about VR for over a decade.
Click to expand...
Apple might be taking a different direction here though. And they have this customer base that buys anything with the logo (I’m part of the problem). Don’t get me started on how little faith I have in Meta.
 
It looks cool and the features are interesting. But at $3500 starting price…that’s a non starter for me.

Also it’s probably not something I can justify because for that amount of money it would need to do way more things. To me it’s just a niche thing. I doubt that this thing will be a hot seller at this price point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Boil said:
The headset is not "just a monitor", it is basically a M2 iPad Pro; just swap the touchscreen for the gestures interface...

And if it were "just a monitor", then why does it have an App Store, and a Home Screen with preloaded apps showing...?
Click to expand...
Ok, let me correct, it’s a TV.

I can’t see it produce world altering 3D graphics on its own, they showed us literally nothing. Only the Disney ad went overboard on concept examples. I could be wrong but we will know soon I guess.
 
Surf Monkey said:
Your entire field of vision is encompassed by screens in the Vision Pro. You’re not looking at reality. You’re looking at reality mediated through a screen. That is NOT the same thing no matter how insulting and condescending you choose to be about it. No matter how much you complain, the essential fact remains: this device presents you with a video image of reality, not reality itself. Therefore the device is inherently more VR than AR. When you can show me a device with a CLEAR face panel, not an opaque screen, you’ll have a point. Until then you should just sit down and stop making a massive fool of yourself.
Click to expand...
I do want to acknowledge that you are now (subconsciously or consciously) conceding that the device does not in fact obscure the user's entire field of vision - and that you've now parsed that rather snatched and unlettered initial assertion in to actually it "encompasses" it. It's been a rollercoaster journey for both of us, but you deserve credit for that. And I'm glad we've reached an agreement (of sorts) that a video image of reality does not "obscure the user's entire field of vision", it augments it. I guess it's not entirely unexpected that the personality type of someone who invests so much time and effort constructing a strawman argument might also compel them to rub it all over anyone and everyone they suspect of having a different perspective.
 
Last edited:
Timo_Existencia said:
Except they hyped their direct collaboration with Unity.com on 3D applications.
Click to expand...

Yes, and these would run on a PC. It would need software integration to work, hence the collaboration with Unity.

Think about it, an M2 is great but it can’t run a high-end game on full 6K resolution, and mapping that to the world around us in real time. Maybe a light game and simple 3D graphics, like they showed us that machine.

i hope I’m wrong and the devs on WWDC will know more soon.
 
NT1440 said:
So in short, a gamer has missed the point of this new platform (and more importantly where it’s going to be) because the world outside of gaming exists. What else is new?

I’m not getting one of these, but it’s pretty clear to see the major focus of this new platform is to bring the world into the next form of computing, ambient/spacial computing.

It does game, but that’s not the real vision for what this will be.
Click to expand...

If a $3500 VR set is stuck in the "Apple ecosystem" and you cannot even use it for something as simple as gaming, which is what VR is mainly being used for, it sucks.

It's a huge application of VR that is being missed for $3500.

I don't care what Apple thinks VR should be used for, they are completely missing the ball here. But I understand Apple only cares about $$$$$$ rather than making a good product, and thus wants to keep you locked in the Apple Store.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Born Again and Pinkyyy 💜🍎
While definitely the most technologically advanced headset it still suffers from all the same flaws as other headsets: you look stupid wearing it, battery life is poor, it is isolating, and there’s no killer use case for it. Also having to buy prescription lenses for this will suck.

I was really hoping Apple could change my mind on AR/VR but sadly they didn’t.

It feels like they took Microsoft’s HoloLens and gave it the Apple treatment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎 and TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back