Apple Stops Work on Lighter Vision Pro to Fast-Track AI Smart Glasses

[JPack]

Are glasses with an embedded camera socially acceptable?

The Meta Display glasses are chonkier than almost all normal glasses, and probably pushing past the limits of acceptability for most.

If the choices are:

1. Socially unacceptable in public, but not absurdly thicker than normal glasses, with maybe a bit more functionality than AirPods (but worse audio)
2. Socially unacceptable in public, and look nothing like glasses, but have the functionality of a typical computer

Why is choice 1 better?

Yes, Meta glasses are socially acceptable. They have an indicator light to show when they’re recording.

Choice 1 is better because you can maintain natural eye to eye contact with the wearer. We’ve evolved millions of years and expect it. Vision Pro completely lacks that.

 

[JPack]

Biggest selling watch ever? I think that's a halo product.

Tim’s predecessor came out with iPhone. Do you really think Watch is a halo product?

Listen to how Tim introduced VP a couple years ago. There’s Mac, iPhone, then VP.

“Just as the Mac introduced us to personal computing, and iPhone introduced us to mobile computing, Apple Vision Pro introduces us to spatial computing.”

 

[retroneo]

I think the M5 Vision Pro might have a significant price drop, let's say $2499. Along with a trade in upgrade program offering up to $1500 buy back of the original Vision Pro M2. The bought back M2 and unsold stock go to the refurbished store for $1999.

A $3499 device isn't going to sell as well as the original, as most who wanted one at that price already have it. Few would shell the same amount again, so sales to upgraders would be minimal. Developers aren't going to bother with much more effore for a device that has such a small user base.

A price drop, upgrade buy back and cheaper refurbished VPs creates an ecosystem that spans a wider range of price points and widens the market. Most importantly, it will help prevent the abandonment of third party development for visionOS.

Apple Watch has a meaning, u can't record ur heartbeat without it.

AirPods Pro 3 does heart monitoring

 

[Siliconguy]

Already have glasses thank you.

 

[mxrider88]

Apple is just trying to catch up with the rest of the world that is moving fast.
Their arrogance killed them and Steve isn’t there to save the day anymore.

They are years behind on everything that requires any sort of AI.

Their software team is dragging them down, if they don’t recognize that and shuffle things around quickly, they’ll end up like blackberry.

 

[Pbwallstreet]

I said on Macrumors before and at the AVP announcement that it would fail because VR as a consumer product is fundamentally flawed. Apple chased people into the market with a me too product.

Now these silly glasses… that will be another failed product and another me too product. Nobody wants to wear glasses and the paradigm itself is limited.

I have also attacked Apple’s potential foldable smartphone, another me too product, in this thread:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/a-foldable-iphone-will-flop.2467178/

Cook… spending money on R&D and producing very little in the way of successful new products alongside complicated product lines. Cook is John Scully all over again.

 

[Johnstrass2]

Disappointing the Vision Pro is an amazing product that just needs some few key smart decisions made to really make it take off. You still can't even buy a vision pro outside of an Apple Store

I still think if there were a slave mode such that I could simply hand it to the guy sitting next to me and drive experience for my iPhone that people would be able to get a taste of how wonderful it is. Nobody bothers to drive to an Apple Store to sit there for a demo, so nobody understands What this incredible machine can do.

 

[lilkwarrior]

I love my Vision Pro but AR glasses with two displays running a version of VisionOS are much more likely to be a bigger hit with consumers than goggles that make you look like a dork when wearing them outside of your home ever will be.

I do think both have a place and I concur with others who say it’s a trillion dollar company so you can’t sell me that they can’t do both at the same time.

It was never an either-or just like laptops vs desktops.

Apple always intended to have a headset and glasses with essentially both powered by VisionOS

 

[TheColtr]

this is great news. Apple is at its best when it feels competitive pressure. I’m really excited to see what the next few years look like.

 

[lilkwarrior]

Good move. Vision Pro was just creepy with those "scuba eye goggle" fake eyes.

…The Vision Pro is still being updated. Like the display business, there won’t be a non-prosumer version which I agree should be indefinite like that business.

There is an abundance of low-end, suboptimal headsets that don’t meet prosumer baselines that are favored to be the baseline of a good spatial computing experience except native VR gaming

 

[lilkwarrior]

same problem with Vision Pro.

people are not willing to use something on your head that can be easily done with a phone, TV, computer.

That’s absolutely not true. The impact of both smart glasses and the prosumer spatial computing market via the Vision Pro contradicts that.

And that’s before new typical alternatives in traditionak mobile platforms like Android XR are in the market.

Many common computing use cases were always meant to be maximized and improved upon via spatial computing.

That isn’t changing

 

[deconstruct60]

THIS IS THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!
Apple, if you want ideas:
- put the Apple watch chip into the glass, computation power is not important at all in wearables. Battery life and weight is.

The H2 Chip uses even less power than the S11 Watch chip.

- run watch os, rather than iOS/iPadOS on the glass. Rely on iPhone for computation. This is your competitive advantage Meta doesn’t have.

Watch OS. If there is no screen what is upside of WatchOS? The HomePod Mni runs a variant of tvOS (if I recall correctly). If all the glasses are doing is audio (in/out) and perhaps pushing down camera output then it is far closer to the firmware that the AirPods run. Extremely little computation means don't really need a relatively large and/or complicated OS either.

[ The HomePod could have a smaller OS than tvOS but I suspect Apple is eventually heading towards something like the Amazon "Show" Screen+Speakers 'smart' device. the Micro display on the mini doesn't need much. It is also likely cheaper for tv and homepod line to 'share' the OS cost overhead over a higher aggregate unit volume also. ]

- focus on notification, and voice + visual AI, those are better on glasses vs phones. The computation is on cloud so you don’t need a powerful chip either.

Hard to do 'visual AI' when have no screen. If mean camera capture computational AI. A mini (or micro) R1 may be a better fit if just have pure "camera RAW" processing issue.

- incorporate Electromyography into Apple Watch, so we don’t have to wear an extra band. You got haptic feedback built in to the watch as well.

The Watch has gyroscopes. There is reduced need to measure signals to the muscles if can feel the motions produced by the muscles. (e.g, Watch already has a pinch to do X , raise to wake , etc. )

If just did orchestration then Glasses + Airpod + Watch (+ Phone) required as a combo would lower the load on he glasses a substantial amount ( wouldn't have to do audio in/out either).

- give us swappable batteries and a charging pouch. I shouldn’t need to take the glass off to charge it.

If sperad the batteries around ( AirPod , Watch , Glasses ) then don't need to be as swappable. Watch and AirPods work without swappable.

This essentially ties the phone-watch-glasses into one coherent ecosystem

The in-ear AirPods already provide audio privacy.

 

[lilkwarrior]

but the best thing about Vision Pro is watching movies on huge screens in some ways better than your home set up, so with ar glasses you loose the best part of what made Vision Pro good

Such glasses is something that was always gonna be the next big step along with equivalent contacts that will be definitely more expensive than the Vision Pro currently as expected and may be delayed deliberately till the tech matures to be more closer to the MSRP of the Vision Pro—maybe below strategically at a loss or very low margins with post-sales revenue streams

 

[Yourbigpalal83]

I got to say the launch of the Meta Rayband Display has been a disaster so far. I have yet to see one mainstream review on it, and getting it without trying it on at very few locations has been a disaster. You cant order it online, but you also cant find a place locally (within 50 miles) to even schedual and appointment to try one on and get your order in.

I really hope if anything apple does better then that. Im all for smart glasses if they work, and i do think its the future, but getting these things on the faces of costumers seems to be more trouble then its worth at the moment!

 

[lilkwarrior]

I like tech quite a lot, BUT even at $399, I would not buy this thing; not interested in strapping a heavy device to my face.
Not even really interested in strapping *any* device to my face. Not when I already have a computer, TV, iPad, phone…million ways to consume content already.
Smart glasses are a *maybe - but if people think I’ve got a cameras pointing at them through my specs then that will also be socially unacceptable.

…People said similar things about smartphones as too convenient cameras and recorders. The market will adapt and will as its inevitable progress to the dismay of fear-mongering pessimists worrying that technology is advancing too fast for policies and reactionary controls to catch up to.

The world will again adapt similar to how technology advanced knowledge sharing faster than the rate of traditional education institutions.

Many private businesses and festivals have already embraced glasses preferably than phones as people are far more present and aware of their surroundings as well hands free to actually engage and buy drinks/food.

Common computing use cases on-the-conduct as following directions, capturing things while active, gathering information about what you saw, and even FPS gaming were ALWAYS going to be better done with spatial computing hardware over time.

This isn’t changing and will be more viable and welcomed as the cost and timeless technology hurdles are removed.

Many are making themselves more important than they really are, overly cynical arguably, or really need to force their local government to ease their minds with sufficient deterrents of people using spatial computing hardware maliciously

 

[deconstruct60]

Ah, I was just randomly speculating.

As we know, previous rumours were that Apple were developing a ‘Pro’ headset and a lighter/smaller ‘Air’ headset and the ‘Glasses’ So perhaps the Pro headset will inherit some of the R&D that’s gone into the Air.

What the reumors generally conveyed about the Vision Pro Air is that it was inheriting R&F from the Vision Pro, not the other way around. The project was to strip some things off the Pro to get the costs down. Tossing features isn't much to do with 'deep' R&D. Have to pick which things to toss, but not tons of innovation there.

It wasn't so much 'Air' ( going to be just as expensive as the iPhone Pro and iPhone Pro move higher). It was 'Air' as in more affordable because offloaded some features ( Macbook Air relative to Macbook Pro in the modern era. )

I know it’s not a product we’ve seen yet, but these things likely exist in some manner inside Apples R&D labs.

I’m just excited to see an Apple headset that’s more the size of a BigScreen Beyond

Apple could have shipped a Vision Pro a lot sooner if they were willing to tether the headset to a base computer. That path was rejected for some reasons I suspect have not changed.

 

[Naraxus]

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Everything other than iPhone Air is just a super conservative chip bump all the time now.

So that being the case, what would you like to see in an iPhone that isn't "...just a conservative chip bump..."? I would suspect a smaller form factor but I'm not sure that would "wow" people but perhaps I'm wrong. Improved Siri perhaps.

 

[Xade]

I don't get the hate for the vision pro. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I would like one, tried it in the shop, was amazed but also slightly nauseous, so I didn't get it. If they come out with a version 2 with a wider field of view and a way to cut down the nausea I'd be all over it. Until then, I'll live without it.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Im all for smart glasses if they work, and i do think its the future

I do not think it’s the future.

A huge chunk of people do not want to wear glasses on their face.

 

[lilkwarrior]

I got to say the launch of the Meta Rayband Display has been a disaster so far. I have yet to see one mainstream review on it, and getting it without trying it on at very few locations has been a disaster. You cant order it online, but you also cant find a place locally (within 50 miles) to even schedual and appointment to try one on and get your order in.

I really hope if anything apple does better then that. Im all for smart glasses if they work, and i do think its the future, but getting these things on the faces of costumers seems to be more trouble then its worth at the moment!

Facebook is prioritizing major tech cities understandably. The BOM or resource allocations for the tech will be limited and not priced for most at traditional
computing devices scale deliberately for some time.

Especially when their margins is deliberately low avoiding unwanted publicity from mostly tech-illiterate lack of understanding why spatial computing hardware must cost much more than traditional

It’s pretty clever and admirable they’re willing to release glasses with a display in the matter they are full of obvious compromises to chase mainstream affinity.

Meta for Apple and others are doing invaluable first mover moves to help all players in the market now and later understand how compromised from ideal spatial computing experiences involving glasses the “average” people will buy at volume.

 

[turbineseaplane]

So that being the case, what would you like to see in an iPhone that isn't "...just a conservative chip bump..."? I would suspect a smaller form factor but I'm not sure that would "wow" people but perhaps I'm wrong. Improved Siri perhaps.

?
You highlighted the one thing I said they are innovating on (iPhone)

Yes, I would like a smaller form factor of the air.

👍

 

[lilkwarrior]

I do not think it’s the future.

A huge chunk of people do not want to wear glasses on their face.

It’s actually recommended for most adults to wear glasses for a wide variety of things and they will as their eyes deteriorate with old age (especially after 40 when it’s too late to even do laser eye surgery).

 

[turbineseaplane]

It’s actually recommended for most adults to wear glasses for a wide variety of things and they will as their eyes deteriorate with old age (especially after 40 when it’s too late to even do laser eye surgery).

That’s a different concept than people wanting to wear them, or enjoying wearing them.

I’m a glasses wearer myself, but fortunate with a pretty light prescription that I can do without in a variety of contexts all the time.

 

[Xade]

Finally a move from Apple that makes sense.

Vision Pro has been a train wreck from the start. There's no killer app, it's expensive, and most importantly, it failed the social acceptance test. Nobody wants to walk around wearing scuba goggles. A lighter version of Vision Pro still has the same problems - hip battery back, loner experience, lack of social acceptance. Nobody wants to pay $1,999 for that.

Glasses are at least socially acceptable.

But people are paying 2k for a 2Tb iphone.....

 

[JPack]

But people are paying 2k for a 2Tb iphone.....

That tells you how off the mark Vision Pro is. People have no problem paying $3,000 for a Mac or MacBook Pro because there's a use case for it. The same can't be said for Vision Pro.