Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Two things I'm wondering about: multi-user capability for allowing others to share one Vision Pro? And how much are additional batteries going to be? Will need a second battery to watch content longer than two hours.
 
Last edited:


Apple today revealed the "Vision Pro" headset, its first mixed-reality headset device, and visionOS, an all new operating system for the device.

Apple-Vision-Pro-with-battery.jpg

Apple describes the Vision Pro headset as "a revolutionary spatial computer that seamlessly blends digital content with the physical world." The device features an all-new operating system that features a three dimensional interface. Experiences in Vision Pro aren't constrained to the boundaries of a display, users can make apps any scale, and place apps wherever they wish. Users use a combination of their eyes, hands, and voice to control the device.

Apple's Vision Pro starts at $3,499 and it will be available early next year. It will be sold in Apple retail stores in the U.S. only at first.

Design

The entire front of the headset is made of polished glass that flows into a lightweight aluminum frame. The top of the headset features a button and a Digital Crown that lets a user control how present or immersed they are in an environment.

Apple-Vision-Pro-glass.jpg

The headset has a modular system to achieve an optimal fit. Its battery is separate and links via a magnetic connection to the side of the headset.



Those who wear glasses must use magnetic prescription ZEISS glass inserts with the Vision Pro headset.

Hardware

Vision Pro features an ultra-high-resolution display system with 23 million pixels across two micro-OLED displays – more than a 4K for TV for each eye.

vision-pro-headset-1.jpg

Vision Pro uses high-speed cameras and a ring of LEDs that project invisible light patterns onto the user's eyes to track gaze. The headset also contains the M2 chip paired with a new "R1" chip, dedicated toward real-time sensor processing.



It also has a new Spatial Audio system with two individually amplified drivers inside each audio pod, which deliver Personalized Spatial Audio based on the user's own head and ear geometry. It can match the sound to an environment using audio ray-tracing. The headset is capable of running for up to two hours on a single charge.

Features

The headset is controlled by a user's eyes, hands, and voice. Users can browse through apps by simply looking at them, tapping their fingers to select, flicking their wrist to scroll, or using voice to dictate. It also supports Apple's Magic Keyboard and Magic Trackpad.

Apple-Vision-Pro-lifestyle-with-battery-FaceTime.jpg

The headset features passthrough video of a wearer's eyes in a feature that Apple calls "EyeSight," displaying the user's eyes to surrounding people. It uses a lenticular OLED display to show the correct perspective to anyone viewing the wearer.

Vision Pro can transform a space into a personal movie theatre and watch immersive videos. With Environments, a user's world can grow beyond the dimensions of a physical room with dynamic landscapes that can help them focus. Vision Pro also allows users to connect to their Mac and expand its display in a virtual space, including alongside apps running on Vision Pro itself.

In FaceTime calls, everyone on the call is reflected in life-size tiles. Users wearing Vision Pro during a FaceTime call are shown as a Persona — a digital representation of themselves.

Optic ID uses a wearer's iris to authenticate users and unlock the Vision Pro headset. Vision Pro is also "Apple's first 3D camera," showing depth in video with Spat... Click here to read rest of article

Article Link: Apple Reveals 'Vision Pro' Headset and visionOS

iPhone 15, iPhone 15 Pro, iPhone 15 Pro Max
Apple Watch SE, Apple Watch, Apple Watch Ultra
Low End, Midrange, High End
Vision, Vision Pro, Vision Ultra???
Maybe even Vision SE
 
Two things I'm wondering about: multi-user capability for allowing others to share one Vision Pro? And how much are additional batteries going to be? Will need a second battery to watch content longer than two hours.
A reviewer said you could add a supplemental battery via the usbc port on the attached battery. If that’s true, we can buy ANY external battery to top up the main battery as it drains for extended use rather than plugging to the wall. Time will tell.
 
A reviewer said you could add a supplemental battery via the usbc port on the attached battery. If that’s true, we can buy ANY external battery to top up the main battery as it drains for extended use rather than plugging to the wall. Time will tell.

How long until someone is walking around town plugged into a portable generator? Probably wouldn’t want to use it indoors though..😳
IMG_1999.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Donfor39
Patent Application since 2007.

Really hard to believe Apple has been working on Apple Vision Pro since 2007. The year of the iPhone. This is just crazy!



I don’t think it’s surprising. Products like this have very long pipelines, most of which terminate as dead ends. Nothing Apple sells was developed in under five years at least.
 
Patent Application since 2007.

Really hard to believe Apple has been working on Apple Vision Pro since 2007. The year of the iPhone. This is just crazy!


That's nuts! That means that this was commissioned under Steve Jobs.
 
Last edited:
That's nuts! That means that this was commissioned under Steve Jobs.

No, it just means that it’s one amongst many things the Apple engineering department was looking into. I doubt Jobs ever had any significant role in the product. The existence of a patent doesn’t mean that they started development when they filed for it. We all know that Apple files for lots of patents on all sorts of things that they never use or make.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SFjohn
No, it just means that it’s one amongst many things the Apple engineering department was looking into. I doubt Jobs ever had any significant role in the product. The existence of a patent doesn’t mean that they started development when they filed for it. We all know that Apple files for lots of patents on all sorts of things that they never use or make.
Look up the sheer number of patents that have Jobs’ name on them during his tenure. It’s the majority of Apple’s patents, and the number is somewhere over a thousand.
 
No, it just means that it’s one amongst many things the Apple engineering department was looking into. I doubt Jobs ever had any significant role in the product. The existence of a patent doesn’t mean that they started development when they filed for it. We all know that Apple files for lots of patents on all sorts of things that they never use or make.
What it really means is all these forum jockeys don't have a clue what Jobs would or would not have approved in 2023. It's just a crotchety appeal to some idealized past authority that can't be disproven, because the dude is dead.
 
What it really means is all these forum jockeys don't have a clue what Jobs would or would not have approved in 2023. It's just a crotchety appeal to some idealized past authority that can't be disproven, because the dude is dead.

Speculation is valid when it’s backed by a legitimate argument. Dismissing it out of hand is just as bad as what you’re complaining about.
 
Speculation is valid when it’s backed by a legitimate argument. Dismissing it out of hand is just as bad as what you’re complaining about.
If someone has substantive arguments about this or that product, sure. But reading the mind of a man who has been dead for 12 years is something that I'm comfortable dismissing out of hand. Even if they're right that Steve would have hated [blank], living people evolve and change their minds. And even then, this is tech... it's completely irrelevant what someone who died 12 years ago thinks about a specific product or practice.

Besides, there are products that Steve disliked but gave the green light; and there are products that he believed in yet gave the axe.

It's a textbook logical fallacy to try to do anything useful with such speculation... its only worth is as cocktail chatter.
 
If someone has substantive arguments about this or that product, sure. But reading the mind of a man who has been dead for 12 years is something that I'm comfortable dismissing out of hand. Even if they're right that Steve would have hated [blank], living people evolve and change their minds. And even then, this is tech... it's completely irrelevant what someone who died 12 years ago thinks about a specific product or practice.

Besides, there are products that Steve disliked but gave the green light; and there are products that he believed in yet gave the axe.

It's a textbook logical fallacy to try to do anything useful with such speculation... its only worth is as cocktail chatter.

This isn’t a rigorous debate.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: AgeOfSpiracles
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.